Smt. Akansha Gupta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S) No. 10100 of 2019 Smt. Akansha Gupta, W/o. Shri Sambhu Gupta, Aged About 32 Years, Occupation Service- Supervisor, Integrated Child Development Project, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, R/o- Kranti Nagar, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

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

2. Collector Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. Project Officer- Integrated Child Development Project, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Project Officer- Integrated Child Development Project, Ludega, Pattahalgaon, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Vinay Pandey, Advocate For State :

Ms. Richa Shukla, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 04.12.2019

1. Grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner, who is working as Supervisor in the Integrated Child Development Project Bilaspur has been transferred to Integrated Child Development Project, Ludeg, Patthalgaon, District Jashpur. It is stated that when she went there to take charge, she could not be given the charge for the reason that six posts of Supervisor are sanctioned and they all are filled and no post is vacant.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to Annexure P-2 issued by the Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Services Project, Ludeg, Jashpur; therefore, the petitioner could not join and despite the fact that one post of Supervisor is lying vacant at Bilaspur, transfer has been made.

3. Perused the documents. Perusal of Annexure P-2 would show that by letter dated 13.11.2019, which was addressed by the Project Officer, Integrated Child Developments Services Project, Ludeg, Jashpur that though the petitioner had appeared to take charge on 11.11.2019, however, the charge could not be given for the reason that no post of Supervisor are lying vacant. The copy was also forwarded to the petitioner. In view of the same, the petitioner is given liberty to make a representation to the respondent No.1 within a period of 15 days, who in turn shall decide the same within an outer limit of 45 days from the date of receipt of the representation. In the meanwhile, under the facts of the case, the transfer of the petitioner shall not be given effect to, till the representation is decided.

4. With such observation, the petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Ashok