•"^' ^"- SINfiLE BENCH IN THE HON»BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR PETITIONER RBSPONDENTS •^ ..?-':^ ^°<^? ^>^.>" ~y W.P. (Sl N0. ^^^7 72011 Ku. Yogita Verma, D/o Shri Manohar Lal Verma, aged about 29 years, R/o Near Deshmukh Kirana Store, Gaya Nagar, Durg, Distt.-Durg (C.G.) working as Women Health Worker at Sub Health Centre Mahmara (Nikum). VERSUS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary Health and Family Welfare, Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director Health Sen/rices, Chhattisgarh Raipur (C.G.) 3 f" Th^ Coflector, Durg Distt. Durg (C.G.) Chief Medical and Health ...•:•" ^^ y§ervice^>Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PETITIONER RESPPNDENTS HiGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITiON (S) No. 5331 OF 2011 Ku.YogjtaVerma Versus ^ State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Singie Bench : Hon?bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:" Shri B.P.Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on this 09 day of September, 2011) Chailenge in this petition is to the order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P-1), whereby, the petitioner working as Woman Health Worker at Sub Health Centre, JVIahmara (Nikum), has been transferred to Sub Heaith Centre, Chakraway (Nawagarh), on administrative grounds. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that under the transfer poiicy dated 13.06.2011 (Annexure P-2), it is clearly stated that the Coisector aione is competent to transfer the employees belonging to Class-EII & IV services on proposal made by the other departments in approval ofthe minister in-charge. in the case on hand, it appears that the Chief Medscal & Heatth Officer, Durg, without foilowing the gyidelines issued in the transfer poiicy had passed the order impugned, when the Collector has been assigned the responslbiiity of transfer of the empioyees working in the concemed district, on proposal of the concerned departments. Thus, this suffers from the defect of competence of the officer. Accordingly, the transfer is unsustainable in the eyes of lav^. As a result, the transfer order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P-1) in respect ofthe petitioner is quashed. Hov^ever, Jiberty is reserved to the government to pass an appropriate order. if so advised, in accordance with law< in administrative exigency and in public interest. Accordjngiy, the writ petition is aiiowed to the above-extent. gshok —sr'