^ingleBench ^ c^ y }^n/^ IN THE HON»BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W P. (Sl N0. ^3^^ /2011 PETITIONBR ^^y Y^'^y ^-'^^-y '^ ^•'l^' ^ ^ ^' RESPONDENTS Smt. Kiran Sahu, W/o Shri Khoman Lal Sahu, aged about 34 years, R/o Bhilai, Sector4, StreetE.M.R., Qtr.No. 15/B, Bhilai, Distt-Durg (C.G.) posted as Women Health Worker at Sub Health Centre, Urla (Nikum) Distt.Durg (C.G.), VERSUS ^ : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretaiy Health and Family Welfare, Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ^ 2. Director Health Services, Chhattisgarh Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Collector, Durg Distt. Durg (C.G.) 4. Chief Medical and Health ^ Sei^ce^, Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLB 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA /'^t!^. H!GH COURTOF CHHATTJSGARH^BJi.ASPUR WRIT PETJTiON (S) No. 5321^F 2011 PETITJONER Smt. Kiran Sahu Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticie 226 ofthe Constitution of india) Slngie Bench : Hon'bSe Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri B.P.Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 09th day of September, 2011) 1. Chalienge in this petition is to the order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P-1), whereby, the petitioner working as Woman Heatth Workerat Sub Health Centre, Urla (Nikum), has been transferred to Sub Health Centre, Somaikaia (Saja), on adminjstrative grounds. 2. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that ynder the transfer poiicy dated 13.06.2011 (Annexure P-2), it is cieariy stated that the Coiiector alone is competent to transfer the empioyees belonging to Class-111 & iV services on proposai made by the other departments in approval ofthe minister in-charge. 3. In the case on hand, Jt appears that the Chief Medicai & Heaith Officer, Durg, without foiiowing the guidelines issued in the transfer policy had passed the order impugned, when the Coil^tor has been assigned the responsibility of transfer of the empioyees working in the concerned district, on proposai of the concerned departments. Thus, this suffers from the defect of competence of the officer. Accordingiy, the transfer is unsustainable in the eyes of lav^. 4. As a resuit, the transfer order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P-1) in respect of the petitioner is quashed. However, liberty is reserved to the government to pass an appropriate order, if so advised, in accordance with law, in administrative exigency and in public interest. 5. Accordingiy, the writ petitlon is aliowed to the above-extent. ashoK Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotrl Judge