CD 6 8W3” We}: I” Chief Medical and Health Officer, Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P.(s) No. XYLWI/L /2011 / PETITIONER Smt. Nilu Ganveer, W/o Anand Ganveer, aged about 27 years, “ / v1:)l‘.%‘[} R/o Bhilai, Risali, Tahsil 85 .- Distt. Durg (C.G.) posted as Women Health Worker at Sub Q.$ Qx°r°°§5...'”x . KC ). w‘a Health Centre Borsi (Nikum) in the health department. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1.” State ofChhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary Health and Family Welfare, Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) / 2. Director Health Services, Chhattisgarh Raipur (C.G.) 3.’ The Collector, Durg Distt. Durg (C.G.) HIGH COURT OF CHHATWSGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETiTiON (S) N0. 5427 OF 2011 (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Consiitutinn of india) Singie Bench : Hon’bie Shri Satish K. Agnihoiri, J. Present :- Shri B.P.Singh, Advocaie for the peiiiioner‘ Shri Arun Sao, Government Advocaie for the Staie. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 15m day of September, 201 1) @ 1‘ Chaiienge inkihis neiiiion is to the order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P4), whereby, the petitioner working as Woman Heaith Worker at Sub Health Centre. Borsi (Nikum‘), has been transferred to Sub Heatth Centre, Batar (Khandsara), on administrative grounds. 2. Learned counset appearing for the petitioner submits that under the transfer policy dated 13.06.2011 (Annexure P-Z), it is cteariy stated that the Coliector alone is competent to transfer the empioyees belonging to Ctass-lll & tV services on proposal made by the other departments in approval of the minister in-oharge. 3. tn the case on hand, it appears that the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Durg, without foliowing the guidelines issued in the transfer policy had passed the order impugned, when the Coilector has been assigned the responsibittty of transfer of the emptoyees working in the concerned district, on proposal of the concerned departments. Thus, this suffers from the defect of competence of the officer. Accordingly, the transfer is unsustainabie in the eves of iaw. 4. As a result, the transfer order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P—t) in respect of the petitioner is quashed. However, liberty is reserved government to pass an appropriate order, if so advised, in accordance with law, in administrative exigency and in pubiic interest. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is atlowed to the above—extent. to the Sdl— SATISH K. ANGNIHORI l Judge asnoK PETiTiONEI—‘é Smt Niiu Ganveer Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others