BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER W,P(S)No. 55'££, /2011 Smt. Savita Saha, W/o. Niranjan Kumar Saha, aged about 48 years, Ladies Health Visitor Community Health Center Jheet, R/o. Jheet, Tahsil-Patan, Dist. Durg (C.G.) VE:;RSUS RESPONDENTS ^^'•'^ \'w''' ..•••"' ^^•:-T^) ^- ^' ,....-;•"[ ?:9"L^'" ..-•-""S ^ y ^'A--" -?^. ^a^^x t[S?/E?. ST^^T ^ -< i( &?fra^is.,.j - IJ \\ '3\ / ~^*~ // ^"^/ . '.^// <^<^ /f '^? ffsn'.^y ''/J ^ :1 The State of Chhattisgarh, Through : the Secretary, Department of Health, D.K.S. Bhawan,-Raipur(C.G.) 2. " Director, Health Services, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Chief Medical & Health Officer; Durg, District Durg (C.G.) 4, r^Block-Medical Officer, Patan, District Durg (C.G.) 5 Medical Officer, Health Community Health Center Jheet, Block Patan, Dist. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. HIOH COURT OF CHHATTTSGARH AT BIT.ASPIJR fT PETmONER WRTT.PETmCT^IS)_No^5566of201 Smt.. Sa.vit.a Saha. RE.SPON'DENTS V1-;RS(JS The State ofCh ;a.rh & Crthers. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTm.mON OF !!NDIA SB: Hon'Me Shri Present: Sliri A.K.Prasad, Advocate tbrthe petititwser. 31m S.K.Mislu'a, Patiel Lawyer for tlie State. O RB E R (Passed oa 19 day of'September, 2011) 1. ChaUenge in ttris petifion is to the <xder dated 15.07.2011 (Annesau-e P/l) whereby the petitioner, working as Ladies Health Visitor at. Community Heaith Centre, .Bieet (Patan) faas beea transferred t.o Seetor Chanda.nu. Khandsara. Dislrict. Diirs. oa a.dministrative srounds. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that under the transfer ooiicv dated 13.06.2011. it is ci.ea.riv st.ated that the Collect.or aloae is comoetent to transfer the emolovees beloneias to class III and c!a,ss IV services, on proposal ma.de by the departments in approval ofthe minister-ia-charse. 3. In tfae case on hand, it appears that the Chief Medical & Health Cfficer, Durg, withoirt. following the giiidelines issiied in the transfer policy, has pa-ssed the impugaed order, when the Coilector has been assigned the responsibility of transfer of the employee working in the concemed district, on proposal of the concemed depa.rtmeiit.s. Thus. ttes s'uffers from the defect of competence of the ofB.cer. Accordiaglv, the transfer is ungiustamable m Ihe eves of transfer order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexiire P/l) ia petitioner, is (luashed. However. Uberiv is reserved to pass appropriate order, if so advised, in iaw, in administrative exisencv and w public 4. As a result, respect. of the to the accordance mterest. 5. Accordinelv. the writ oetition is allow'ed to the above ext.ent. -t../-—-^ Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge