Sangeeta Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6915 of 2019 Sangeeta Yadav D/o Late Shri P.L. Yadav Aged About 37 Years Posted As Supervisor-Integrated Child Development Project, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Women And Child Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Director Women And Child Development Department, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ----Respondents For Petitioner :
Mr. Anup Majumdar, Advocate For State :
Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05/09/2019
1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the impugned order (Annexure P/1) dated 21.08.2019 , whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the post of Supervisor of, Integrated Child Development Project, District Bilaspur to Lundra, Ambikapur.
2. The limited grievance that the petitioner has made in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondent No.1 to consider the case of the petitioner for being posted anywhere in the State of Chhattisgarh and the request is only of being posted at the concerned district headquarter. The reason for posting in the concerned district headquarter is that the petitioner needs medical attention because of the treatment of epilepsy that the petitioner is undergoing.
3. Given the aforesaid contention that the petitioner has made, let the petitioner make a detailed representation to the respondent No.1
within a period of 10 days from today and the respondent No.1 in turn shall consider the request of the petitioner sympathetically in accordance with the transfer policy of the State Government at the earliest preferably within a further period of 30 days from the date of receipt of representation. Meanwhile, there shall be a stay of the effect and operation of the impugned order, so far as the petitioner is concerned.
4. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off.
Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved