Smt. Sanju Tiwari v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7602 of 2019 Smt. Sanju Tiwari W/o - Sandeep Kumar Shastri Aged About 35 Years R/o -Baima Village, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, Currently Working As Supervisor At Integrated Child Development Project, Sarkanda Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Woman And Child Welfare, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Commissioner, Department Of Women And Child Welfare, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Collector, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. District Programme Officer, District Women And Child Welfare Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

5. District Programm Officer, District Women And Child Welfare Officer, Kabirdham, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Advocate For State :

Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 16/09/2019 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 Integrated Child Development Project Sarkanda Bilha 2, Bilaspur to Integrated Child Development Project, Kukdur District Kabirdham.

2.

The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has just availed the maternity leave and has resumed the duty and she has got a small infant child with her to take care of, and therefore, at this juncture, transfer would create difficulties for the petitioner and her family. He further submits that husband of the petitioner is also posted at the place nearby the petitioner is posted and therefore the transfer policy of the State Govt.

-2should have been borne in mind by the respondent trying to accommodate the husband and wife at the same place as far as possible. He further submits that there is no reliever to the petitioner made and therefore she can be accommodated at the same place for some more time. 3.

Given the aforesaid facts, let the Petitioner make a representation to the respondents in this regard within a period of 7 days from today and respondents in turn shall take a decision within a further period of 3 weeks from the date of receipt of representation of the petitioner. 4.

Till then purely as an interim measure, the effect and operation of the impugned order so far as the petitioner is concerned shall remain stayed. 5.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha