Anuradha Arya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 9634 of 2019 • Anuradha Arya, D/o Shri P.L. Arya, Aged About 39 Years, Posted As Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Project, Takhatpur - 2, (Sakti), District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Women And Child Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Director Women And Child Development Department, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Anup Majumdar, Advocate For Respondents/ State :

Shri Ravish Verma, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 25/11/2019

1. This is second round of litigation the petitioner has been transferred from Integrated Child Development Project Takhatput-2, Sakri, District Bilaspur to Farasgaon-2, Badedongar, District Kondagaon. In the earlier round of litigation in WPS No. 7931 of 2019 this Court on 01.10.2019 has passed the following orders:-

2. The limited indulgence that the petitioner has sought is for keeping the order of transfer in abeyance as of now for the reason that mother of the petitioner is totally dependent upon the petitioner who is suffering from advance stage of cancer and is undergoing treatment at the Apollo Hospital at Bilaspur. Therefore, presence of the petitioner as of now is required at Bilaspur indispensably.

3. Given the aforesaid facts & circumstances of

the case, let the petitioner make a representation to the respondent No. 1 within a period of 10 days from today and respondent No. 1 in turn shall consider the same sympathetically at the earliest.

4. Meanwhile, the effect and operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed so far as the petitioner is concerned.

5. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though specific representation has been made, it has been dismissed by order dated 11.11.2019 wherein specific grievance of the petitioner has not been considered. State may be directed to consider the specific grievance of the petitioner.

3. Perused the documents filed along with the petition.

4. It is contended that decree of Divorce (Annexure P-11) and medical document of petitioner's mother have been filed wherein she is stated to be patient of cancer and under going treatment at Bilaspur.

5. Considering the same and the dismissal order of representation which has been decided prima facie it appears these facts were not taken into consideration. Therefore, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a fresh representation to Respondent No. 1 within 15 days from today and the same being filed shall be decided by Respondent No. 1 within a further period of 45 days.

6. In the meanwhile, parties are directed to maintain status quo, as on today, till the representation is decided.

7. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Jyoti