IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 3526 of 2011. Decided on: 1.11.2011. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Padma Joshi … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No. For the petitioner : Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 to 3 : Mr. P.K. Sharma, Addl. AG and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy.AG. For respondent Nio.4 : None. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral) The petitioner, who is working in the respondent- Department as Female Health Worker (FHW), is aggrieved by order of transfer, Annexure P-2, dated 13.5.2011, whereby she has been transferred from Health Sub Centre (HSC), Panesh, District Shimla to HSC, Suru, District Shimla against private respondent No.4. 2. The relevant extract of order of transfer, Annexure P-2, dated 13.5.2011 has been filed with the petition as Annexure P-2/T, which is as under:- “With the prior approval of the competent authority, the following transfer/adjustment/cancellation in respect of Female Health Workers and Female Health Supervisors are hereby ordered with immediate effect:- Sr. No. Name of official with designation. From To Whether TTA allowed or not. Remark s 1 to 68 xx xx xx xx xx 69. Smt. Raj Kumari, FHW who is under order of Transfer from UHTC 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 Boileauganj to HSC Suru and further adjusted at HSC Rampuri ordered vide this Directorate Office Order dated 3.5.2011 is now hereby adjusted at HSC Panesh vide Smt. Padma Joshi, FHW with immediate effect. 70. Smt. Padma Joshi, FHW HSC Panesh District Shimla. HSC Suru, District Shimla. Yes. 71 to 115. xx Xx xx xx xx” 3. A perusal of office order, Annexure P-1, dated 30.4.2010 would go to show that earlier the petitioner was working in HSC, Andhri, District Shimla from where she was under transfer to HSC, Saj, District Solan, but was adjusted at HSC, Panesh, District Shimla, meaning thereby that she had already completed her normal tenure at HSC, Andhri when she was adjusted at HSC, Panesh in April, 2010. However, vide office order, Annexure P-2 dated 13.5.2011, she has again been transferred just after about one year of her stay at HSC, Panesh, apparently to adjust private respondent No.4, who was under transfer from UHTC, Boileauganj to HSC, Suru and further under orders of adjustment to HSC, Rampuri. 4. It is stated on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 in their reply that as on now both the petitioner and respondent No.4 are continuing at the same station, that is, HSC, Panesh in terms of interim order dated 19.5.2011 passed by this Court. 5. In view of the above, the impugned order of transfer, Annexure P-2 dated 13.5.2011 on the face of it appears to be against the transfer policy framed by the State Government according to which the normal tenure of an employee at a particular station is three years. 3 6. In view of the above, petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No. 1 to 3/competent authority to allow the petitioner to continue at HSC, Panesh till she completes her normal tenure at that station and adjust private respondent No.4 at an appropriate place so that the anomalous situation as obtaining in this case in which two employees are working against the same post is rectified at the earliest. 7. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. 8. In view of the disposal of the main petition, pending CMPs shall also stand disposed of as infructuous. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. November 1, 2011. (cr)