3 c g.voai IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CG) WRIT PETITION N0 1 ^ ^ /2005 ^- PETITIONER Smt. Kiran Pandey, wife of Shri Ashok Pandey, aged about 38 years, occupation - Service, Working as A.N.M. (Aiixiliary Nurse Medwife) at village Batrapali, under C.H.C. PaU, Distt. Korba (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^ 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Ghhattisgarh) ".^••ro^ : •5.;..!;r;i5^- ^^^•f \.^^s^^....<"""^;> ^w^>^' '^-•\"^ ^ <-5. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Health and Fgkmily Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Director, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Collector, Distt. Korba (C.G.) The Chief Medical and Health Officer, Distt. Korba (C.G.) The Block Medical Officer, C.S.C. Pali, Distt. Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETTTION_UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, XI-HC-22 3:n^T^T f^t^^TT^T ^b^icb^cr ^.~ 3:°? r^Ni^i^i, ^TTI^^KO, f®t<ni^^< 3115^1 M5ich ^INdl shNicb* ' ' /'H^ 200^$^ i^rc^ rl2^- 19-4-200S Mr, Sushil Dubey^ COUD Mr, Bhaskar Pya.si, Paa Heard both the counsel, The petitioiier who is w< Pnmai3r Health Centre, under Article 226/227 of th grievaace is fhat she has be passed by respondentNo.2 Centre, Pathaiiya, District: traiisferrcd to Pattiadya indic on her own request, whereas Thcreforc, the petitioner has request made by her, In the circumstaaces, 1< fhat fhe petitioner inay be respondent No.2 bringiag this rectify fhe Biistake, to which Chhattisgarh has uo objectior Havmg heard leamed c< to fhe facte and circuiastancel Biake a detaUed representati< froni today raisuig all her grid directed to conslder the decide the same within a receipt of the representation i chi^I<n41ri ^i^<v?l'^1^t<Ri«i< ^3T|^TT3TT^T ^ouii|sel for fhe petitioner, ^l Lawyer for fhe State, s|>rkmg as Auxffimy Nurse Midwife iti the Batr^.paU, has prefeiTed this writ petition ^ Constitution of India, and her ixiaia jen transferred by fhe impugned order j&:022i Batrapali to CoBimunity Healfh Bilaspur. Tlie petitioner has been jatiag fhat this ti-aasfer has been niade 1, she had never xnade such a request. been transferrcd wrongly without any ^araed counsel for the petitioner prayed |allowed to niake a representation to fact to the notice of respondent No.2 to leanied Panel Lawver for the State of |>unsel for the parties and having regard ^ of the case, the petitioner is allowed to itati<|>n to respondent No,2 wifhin ten days |vraaces, and ta tuTD., respondent No*2 is repxlesentation made by ffae petitioner aiid petiod ofthirty days from tlie clate of the i|a an objective niaaner after considering XI-HC-22 ^T^F^T i^ri^^T^ ^Hich^Tf?cT ^~ I-TTR^I ^^a<^ 3^r ^i^ii^, ^Tn^4i?, (G<^^y s^ ^ W ^S^lch 60^ ^ f^^ 3TT^T?^<TTW^rf5cT - S-+ the grievances of fhe petitio4e3 petitioner is ah-eady not reliev^d, the dccision of her representati^n, With the directlons afore^ Consequentiy, M.(W.)P.N| also staad disposed of, Parties are entitied for ce^tified copy of fhis order. 4>|^I<rl41^ ^IKdT^'fa^ <^t^l< ^3^?TW^T er, ia accordan.ee wifh law, If the 1, fhen she should not be reUeved till 3U, »aid, the petition stands disposed of. o.1155/2005 and I.A.No.2832/2005 Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge