IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7566 of 2009 NAND KUMAR MISHRA SON OF BASHISHSTHA NARAYAN MISHRA RESIDENT OF BHAGANPUR HAT, P.S. BHAGANPUR HAT DISTRICT SIWAN AST PRESENT ON DEPUTATION AS MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, MARWAN DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE JOINT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, HEALTH, MUZAFFARPUR. 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MUZAFFARPUR. 6. THE CIVIL SURGEON CUM CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, MUZAFFARPUR. 7. DR. NARENDRA KUMAR, MEDICAL OFFICER, MUZAFFARPUR. ----------- 6 02/05/2011 Annexure-1 is the order which has been challenged by the petitioner. This is dated 21.01.2009. By virtue of this order, petitioner who was working as Incharge, Primary Health Centre, Sahabganj has been now deputed to work under the Deputy Superintendent, Sadar Hospital, Muzaffarpur. He was directed to hand over charge to the Medical Officer immediately. Submission of the learned counsel is that all these have been done at the behest of the local M.L.A. and if any transfer order is passed at the behest or such - 2 - intervention of a public representative, the order of transfer or deputation ought to be interfered with. He further submits that necessary notification issued by the Civil Surgeon cannot be issued as he does not have the requisite power in this regard. A detailed counter affidavit both on behalf of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Muzaffarpur as well as the District Magistrate has been filed. Plethora of evidence has been annexed with regard to the functioning, conduct and other omission and commission which have been committed by the petitioner while working in the capacity as Incharge Medical Officer of Primary Health Centre. Obviously, things have gone beyond tolerance and the district administration thereafter had to intervene, may be provoked by creation of law and order situation because of the activities of the petitioner which were not totally within his power or ambit of performance of his responsibility. It is not that every order of transfer must be judged on a very strict interpretation of the parameters or the necessity for transfer because the transfer does not seem to be based merely on the provocation of an M.L.A. It is a case - 3 - where M.L.A. might have been provoked because of large number of complaints which he might have received as a public representative from the persons who were working in the Hospital and other citizen as well. The Court intentionally does not want to record all the allegations which have emerged from the pleadings and the annexures, lest it may further damage his future career but so far as the present transfer or deputation is concerned, this Court is satisfied that it is not one of those cases where the petitioner is being victimized because he is a whistle blower. Fact is otherwise. This writ application is dismissed. It goes without saying that the respondents will ensure that the petitioner gets his salary if he has joined the post where he has been transferred and he has no other obligation with regard to the past post which he had held. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)