Ku. Prakriti Bhatt v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 7646 of 2019 Ku. Prakriti Bhatt D/o Shri Om Prakash Bhatt, Aged About 34 Years, Supervisor, Integrated Women And Child Development Department, Posted In Kota Block Kota, District Bilaspur, Civil And Revenue District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Development, Mahanandi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Director, Women And Child Development Department, Indrawati Bhawan, 4th Floor, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The District Program Officer, Integrated Women And Child Development Department, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. The Project Officer, Project Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate For State :

Ms. Abhyunati Singh, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 17.09.2019

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P-1 dated 21.08.2019 whereby the services of the petitioner have been transferred from Kota, district Bilaspur to Baikunthpur, district Koria.

2. The ground of challenge is that firstly the petitioner has recently joined at the present place of posting i.e. at Kota, district Bilaspur. The

second ground of challenge is that the father of the petitioner is suffering from various illness. The third ground is that the distance between the two places is more than 200 kilometers and on these grounds the petitioner should not have been transferred at this juncture.

3. Perusal of the record would show that the petitioner is working at the present place of posting for about 2 years now. Further the ground of ill health of the father of the petitioner is not a ground for challenging an order of transfer. So far as the distance is concerned, the post on which the petitioner is working is a transferable post, therefore, this Court does not find any strong case made out by the petitioner to interfere with the impugned order of transfer.

4. At this juncture, counsel for the petitioner prays that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to the respondents and the respondents in turn may be directed to decide the same as expeditiously as possible.

5. Not opposed.

6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed off with liberty to the petitioner, if she so chooses, may prefer a detailed representation to the respondents. Considering the fact that it is a case of transfer, the respondents may decide it as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, as per the rules.

Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai