— -^ _____^-s c HI6H COURT OF JUMCATUR6 AT BILASPUR CC,6.) Writ Petition No.2305 of 2003 PETCTIONeRS! RESPONDENTS 1. S.K. Dunire, son of Madhukar Soni, (Dumre), Aged about 40 years, Occupation; Pharmaciat, poa+ed a+ Bhitei Oispensary, C.S.E.B., Bhitai, District Durg (C.S.) 2. Smt. Anita Dumre, wife of 5.K. Dumre, aged about 35 years, Occupotion: A.N.M. posted at Bhilai Wspensory, C.S.6.B., Bhilai, t»strict-Durg.(C.6.). Versua 1. Chhattidgarh State Electricity Board, Through Secretary, C.S.E.B., Raipur, 6istrict Raipur (C.6.) 2. Joint Secretary, (P)-II, C.S.E.B., Raipur, District Roipur, (C.6.). 3. Additional Secretary, C.S.E.B., Roipur, &istrict; Raipur, (C.S.). POST FGR ORbBt ON / ^ AU6UST 2003 Sd/- , L.C.BHADOO Judge' HISU Ca/RTOF JU6ICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.6.) Writ Petition No.2305 of 2003 ^s-;) PE'TITIONERS! RESPONbENTS 1. S.K. t>umre, son of Madhukar Soni, (Dumre), Aged about 40 yeors, Occupation: Pharmacist, posted at Bhilai Mspensary, C.S.E.B., Bhilai, Olstrict burg (C.6.) 2. Smt. Anita Dumre, wife of S.K. Dumre, cged about 35 years, Occupation: A.N.M. posted at Bhilai Dispensary, C.S.E.B., Bhilcu, District-Ourg, (C.6.). Versus 1. ChhattiS9°i^' State Eleetriei+y Board, Through Secretary, C.S.E.B., Raipur, District Raipur (C.@.) 2. Joint Secretary, (P)-II, C.S.E.B., Raipur, District Raipur, (C.6,). 3. Additional Secretary, C.S.E.B., Roipur, District: Raipur, (C.6.). Present;- Shri Awadh Tripathi, Advoca+e Shri 5anjay K. Agrawcd, t)y. A.G. For the petitioners. For the State / respondents. ORDBt (Passed on /^-s%.. Auaust. 2003) As per Justlce L.C. Bhadoo: - 1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constltution of Indla, the petltioners have challenged their transfer order dert'ed 26-7-2003, Annexure-P/1 by which they are Lilia. 'S-6'' 2 transferred from Bhilai &ispensary to Board's &ispensary, Jcgdalpur. 2. The peTITioners' case 15 ThaT petitioner No.l S.K. bumre, Is working as Pharmacist and petitioner Np.2 5mt. Anita Dumre, is working as A.N.M. in Bhilai Dispensary, C.S.E.B., District Durg. Initially, they were employees of M.P.E.B- At the time of formation of thc S+a+e of Chhattiagarh thcy applied for their allocation to The State of Chhattisgarh because they are permanent resident of District Dur0. The petitioner No.l was allocated to the State of ChhattiS9arh by the order dated 28-8-2001 and the petitioner No.2 wos allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh by the orderdated 5-12-2001. The petitioner No.l was posted at Korba and Thereafter Transferred to Bhllal. The petitloner No.2 was also posted at Korba, but she was also transferred to Bhilai in the month of July 2002 vide Annexures- P/8AP/9. 3. Now, within a period of one year they have been transferred to Jagdalpur. They hcwe admitted their child in Indu I.T. School, Bhilai. Their child is also suffering from eye disease and he is being treorted at Bhilai. The parents of petitioner No.l are also resident of Bhilai and the petitioner No.l is the only son of their parents and at the old 090, the petitioner No.l is r-equired to remain with them. 4. The order dated 19-5-2.003, Annexure-P/ll ufas pcesed in whlch it was ordered thcrt three new dispensaries are being established at Bilaspur, Jagdalpur and Raipur and the medical officer-s and the :i:-ri-rl' ^ 7. 8. 9. staff will be deployed from Korba East and Korba West Hospitals. Now, contrary to that order, thc petitioners have been transferred to Jagdalpur, Therefore, This order be quashed. In the rejoinder, it is stated that the petitioners are not surplus. Moreover, the persons who wepe posted at Bhilai in the year 1985-86 are still continuin9 ond the petitioners have been tranaferrcd wi+hin a period of one year. On The other hond, reply has been filed on behalf of The respondents in whichit hos been stated that the petitioners had not niorked at Korba. They were on leave. They joinedonly at Bhilai. Since three new dispensaries have been created and they are +o be made functional from 15 August 2003, therefore, the surplus staff has been transferred to oll The three new dispensaries. The petitioners were surplus at Bhilai, therefore, they have been transferred to Jagdalpur and that too on the ground of adminis+ra+ive exigencies as +he rww dispensaries are to be made functional from 15 August 2003 and they have been relieved on 2nd Au9ust 2003. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners have raised the ground that they have hardly comple+ed one year ot the present place of posting. One pharmacist Mr. Saryay ffade is workin9 in Bhilai Dispensary since 1989 and one 5nit. Usha Kundu is working as A.N.M. at Bhilai since 1985. They could have been Transferred To Jagdalpur. As has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the Court can interfere in the watter of transfer of officiols/officers only '&s. when the transfers are made on malafide grounds or cgainst the sta+utory provisions. Both the 9rounds have not been raised in Thls case. The only Inconvenience and dlfflculty has been put forwarded by the petitioners is that they have completed only one year and the other persons who are wor'kin9 at Bhilai Dispensary since last 18 years should have been transferred and moreover, they have admittcd their child in the school and the parcnts of The peTitioner No.l are otd a9ed and hls presence Is requlredwlth them in order to attend their needs. ^ 1 10. The petitioners should have raised all these difficulties before the respondents by way of representation which they have not roiaed and it ia for the reapondenta to consider the caae of the petitloners in the light of the points ralsed in this wrlt petlTion. Since they have not made any representation to the respondents, it is, therefore. directed that the petitioners shall make their representation narr'a+in9 all the poin+s which they have roised before this Court within a per-iod of 10 days from the date of recelpt of copy of this order and the respondents are dlrected to consider the representation of the petitioners and take appropriate decision within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation in an objective manner. II. The writ petition is disposed of accordin9ly. 12. Consequently, M.(W.)P. No. 2108/Z003 <& 1.A. No. 7093/Z003 also stand dlsposed of. Sd/- , L.C.BHADOO Judge Barve' \ "^