Smt. Soma Vasudeo v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.S. NO. 6202 OF 2018 • Smt. Soma Vasudeo, W/o Shri Nirpat Vasudeo, aged about 60 years, Village & Post Navagaon, Tah. & Block Pendra, Police Station Pendra, District Bilaspur (CG) ... Petitioner versus 1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Women And Child Development Secretariat, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanandi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2.

The Director, Directorate Of Women And Child Development Department, Mahanandi Bhawan, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3.

The District Programme Officer, District Bilapur, Composite Building, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

4.

The Child Development Project Officer (Integrated Child Development Scheme), Pendra, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 5.

The Child Development Project Officer (Integrated Child Development Scheme) Ramanujnagar, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. 6.

Jila Panchayat Bilaspur, Through Chief Executive Officer, Bilaspur District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advocate.

For Respondents :

Mr. R.K. Gupta, Dy. Advocate General.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 19/09/2018 1.

Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order of transfer, Annexure P-1, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Pendra, District Bilaspur to Ramanujnagar, District Surajpur. 2.

Without entering into the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that considering the fact that the petitioner is a lady and that she is over 60 years of age and has got barely less than 2 years of service left for superannuation, the respondents may reconsider whether it was really necessary for transferring the petitioner from the present place of posting at the fag-end of her career.

3.

On this limited ground, the petitioner is directed to make a representation to the authorities concerned within a period of 10 days from today and the authorities concerned shall take a decision at the earliest on the representation so made by the petitioner. Meanwhile, the authorities

concerned shall not give effect to the impugned order so far as the petitioner is concerned.

4.

If the petitioner fails to make a representation within 10 days, the order passed by this Court would loose its efficacy. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ Judge