I),a tt.` •,., a I. 28.2.2005 lN THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM OFZDEFt SHEET WFUT PETITION ( C ) t4AF`cnREIT DIRETOR. Versus CENTFuhl. No. 3 of 2005 Petitioner/Apse_uaut= Bespondent 8 I RESEARCH IN AyBfrvEDz` a sDDm a crafts Order w.ith Signature Off ice Note as to action (if any) taken on Order Heard Mr. A. Moulik assisted by Mr. N. a. Sherpa, learned Counsel for the petitioner. In this writ petition, the petitioner Mrs. Margaret Lepcha, questioned the validity of the impugned transfer order dated 14.2.2005 as well as the relieving order dated 22.2.2005 by contending inter alia, that the respondent No.4 had been managing to employ his wife, Smt. Dipa Makhija by transferring the petitioner from her place of posting at Regional Research Institute (Ay.), Tadong, Gangtok to Regional Research Institute (Ay), Itanagar. It is submitted at the Bar by Mr. A. Moulik, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner, having apprehension about her transfer from her present place of posting to Regional Research Institute (Ay.) Itana`gar, by the malafide action of the respondent No.4, Dr. P. Makhija, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Director, Central Council for Research in Ayurveda and Siddha, Institutional Area, New Delhi, the lst respondent herein. The representation dated 18.10.2004 was duly communicated by the petitioner to the respondent No.1 on time, but the said representation has not yet been disposed of till date. ialOf Dateof :i,+i.`,:.:;':..::`?ia.;`;;,ir`iih'§ig`;atule OfficeNote¥toaction(ltany) ler Order taken on Order We have perused the said representatlon date Ai,## 18.10.2004,whichisself-explanatory. According to us, it is the lawful duty of th respondent No. 1 to examine and consider the sai representation and dispose of the same in accordance with the related Service Rules and la In view of the above position, this Court has n alternative but to direct the respondent No.1 t consider the case of the petitioner and dispose of th said representation sepp within a period of thre months' from the date of receipt of this order, thu communicating the result of it to the petitioner i time. Considering the nature of the case, we als madethefollowing .~ order:- Pending final disposal of the sai representation dated 18.10.2004, as in Annexur P8, by the appropriate authority, namely, th respondent No.1, the impugned transfer orde date d 14. 2. 2005 be aring Office Orde No.1846/2005 dated 14th February, 2005 and th relieving order dated 22nd February, 2005shall no be given effect to, in other words, status quo ant with regard to the service conditions of th petitioner as on 13.2.2005 shall be Biaintaine and she should be allowed to serverRegiona Research Institute (Ay), Tadong as usual. ' We also made it clear that the authorit concerned i.e., the respondent No.1 shall look int the affairs of the Regional Research Institute (Ay Tadong, Gangtok and the working condition of it, s that the employees of it may feel that justice has bee done to them. Serial ffite Order with Signature Office Note as to No. of of action (if any) Order Order taken on Order At/ For the reasons, observations and direction made above, this Writ Petition is finally disposed of. -, tN.sN:#f#de~I Chief JhLsfiice I_ JLe&g.i de ( A. Prswhba ) -e C.M.A.No.7/2005 In view of the Order passed today in Wr. Petition ( c ) No.3/2005, Misc. application 1 accordingly closed. A . IV.S"~ry.alan!si=„ Chief JFusfi¢e I Acta.I al4 ( A. P. Swhl,a ) J_h`_dg€