IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6205 of 1997 Dr.(Smt.)Chandrawati Kumari, Wife of Dr. Abhay Kumar Choudhary, Assistant Director, P.P. Programme, Patna Medical College Hospital, Patna, resident of Rajendra Nagar, Police Station Kadam Kuan, Town and District Patna. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner, Health Services, New Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Additional Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary, Health Department of the State Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Deputy Director, Health Services, State Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 4. The Program Director, P.P. Program, Patna Medical College Hospital, Patna. 5. Dr. Smt. Alka Pandey, Wife of not known, Medical Officer, P.P. Program, Patna Medical College Hospital, Patna. 6. Deputy Secretary to the Government, State Government of Bihar, Patna. --------- Respondents ----------- 7 13.07.2010 Head Mr. Ram Suresh Rai, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Kumar Alok, learned S.C.19, for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “1. That this writ application is for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction of this Hon‟ble Court for quashing transfer of petitioner from the non-tenure post of Assistant Director, P.P. Programme, Patna Medical College Hospital, Patna (herein after referred to as P.M.C.H.) to Sadar Hospital Hazipur, Vaishali vide Memo No. 278(2) dated 18.6.1997 2 (contained in Annexure-„10‟) as also for quashing the notification No. 496 (2) dated 25.6.1997 (contained in Annexure-„11‟) whereby and whereunder the Respondent No.5 has been posted in place of the petitioner in P.P. Programme, P.M.C.H. as Assistant Director in contravention of the Rule framed by the State Government for organization of Post Partem Programme contained in Annexure-„1‟, in the circumstances set forth below” At the inception, Mr. Kumar Alok, learned counsel for the State, would submit that whatever could have been examined by this Court in this case pertaining to the claim of the petitioner to remain posted in P.P. Program in P.M.C.H. has lost its essence on account of abolition of the P.P. Program itself. Learned counsel for the petitioner also readily agrees that the order of approval, which was challenged in this case, was made operative, inasmuch as, the petitioner had already been relieved. That being so, now when the question of the petitioner, being posted in P.P. Programme, either in the P.M.C.H. or any 3 other place on account of abolition of the P.P. program itself is no longer in existence, there would be hardly any scope for interference by this Court as with regard to limited prayer of the petitioner. At this stage, Mr. Rai would point out that the petitioner has another lis, inasmuch as, she actually belongs to the teaching cadre but is being treated as a doctor of the general cadre. He would submit that once this writ application is disposed of on account of abolition of the P.P. Program, this much liberty be given to the petitioner to represent her case for being treated as a part of the teaching cadre in the medical colleges. In the opinion of this Court, though the prayer, as quoted above, even remotely does not connect the grievance of the petitioner with regard to her being either in teaching cadre or general cadre but then as an impact of the order of transfer may have some bearing on her future continuance in either of the two cadres, this Court would give liberty to the petitioner to approach 4 the Principal Secretary of the Health Department as with regard to the claim of posting on teaching post. It is, however, made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on such claim of the petitioner and therefore, it will be open for the Principal Secretary, Health Department to take his own decision on the basis of the materials on record and in accordance with law. If the petitioner approaches the Principal Secretary of the Health Department by filing a representation for this purpose, the same must be disposed of by a speaking order within a period of four months from the date of its being filed before him. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)