IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 1780 of 2011. Decided on : 18.11.2011 ________________________________________________ Meera Devi … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others … Respondents. ___________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. T.S. Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 3. None for respondent No.4, though served. ____________________________________________________ V.K. Sharma, Judge (oral). The petition has been filed on the following substantive prayers vide para 7 (a) to (c):- “a) That a writ of certiorari may kindly be issued quashing the annexure P-4 dated 16.3.2010. b) That a writ of Mandamus may kindly be issued to the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue till normal tenure at her present place of posting. c) That respondents may be directed to declare as surplus the senior most persons serving as Female Health Worker at Zonal Hospital Bilaspur.” 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 2. In reply, respondents No. 1 to 3 have taken the following stand vide para 3 of the preliminary submissions:- “That it was for these bonafide reasons, but not for any other reason, that the present Petitioner in the capacity of surplus Female Health Worker alongwith the other similarly situate persons was ordered to be shifted from RH, Bilaspur to Sub Centre Gharan against vacancy in condonation of short stay vide Office Order dated 16-3-2011 (Annexure P-4),which may kindly be perused by this Hon’ble Court. It is added that as per the information supplied by the Respondent No.3, it was actually not the Petitioner alone who being surplus was shifted from RH Bilaspur, but almost all other similarly placed employees including the Respondent No.4 who were surplus and continuing against other posts than the actual sanctioned posts of Female Health Workers, irrespective of their seniority were ordered to be shifted being surplus over there as basically there existed only 4-posts of Female Health Worker sanctioned and created at RH Bilaspur, but actually the other surplus incumbents were continuing against the posts of Auxiliary Nurse Midwives. Moreover, the duties of the Petitioner being in the nature of the field duties, she is required to 3 work at the stations of vacancy wherever ordered to be posted on need and priority basis.” 3. Respondent No.4 has not chosen to appear and contest the petition despite due service. 4. In view of the above reply, the petition is disposed of with a direction that subject to the petitioner making a detailed representation supported by documents, if any, along with copy of this judgment to respondent No.2 within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment, who shall consider and decide the same within further two weeks in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, if so advised. Needless to say that while taking decision on the representation the principle of ‘first come first go’ shall be strictly adhered to, meaning thereby that the incumbent with longer stay shall be considered first for being declared surplus in relation to those who have shorter stay. 5. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any, in the above terms. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. November 18, 2011. (Lsp)