Allowed

Sau. Saheba Sultana W/O Ansar Abdul v. State of Mah. Thr. Its Principal Secty. and Ors.

Bombay HC9 Mar 2012WP/1120/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that a petitioner's letter to the Chief Minister requesting a brief meeting did not constitute pressure to hold her transfer. The court disapproved the Divisional Commissioner's observations, vacated the stay on her transfer, and directed the Divisional Commissioner to decide her representation expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Disapproved the Divisional Commissioner's observations; vacated the stay on transfer; directed expeditious decision of the representation.

Sau. Saheba Sultana W/O Ansar Abdul Vs State of Mah… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

0903wp1120.12

¶2

1/3

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1120 OF 2012

¶5

(Sau. Saheba Sultana w/o Ansar Abdul vs. State of Maharashtra and others) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶6

Shri M. Sable, Advocate for petitioner.

¶7

Shri D.B. Yangal, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos. 1 and 2.

¶8

CORAM : S.A. BOBDE AND P.B. VARALE, JJ.

¶9

DATED : MARCH 9, 2012

¶10

The petitioner is a person, who is handicapped of more than 60%. She seeks transfer of her service from Darwha to Yavatmal.

¶11

In the circumstances, we consider it appropriate that the representation made by the petitioner on 21/10/2011 should be decided expeditiously. The learned Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that according to the policy framed by the State Government, it is permissible to

¶12

0903wp1120.12

¶13

2/3

¶14

accommodate a handicapped person at a place of his or her choice. However, in the present case, the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division has put the petitioner's transfer on hold because according to the Divisional Commissioner, the petitioner brought pressure on him.

¶15

We find from the record that the only thing that could have been construed as a pressure is a letter dated 20/10/2011 written by the petitioner to the Chief Minister of Maharashtra asking for an appointment for 5-10 minutes for explaining her difficulties. We are of the view that such a letter should not be construed as an attempt to bring pressure since it appears that the petitioner was only expressing her anguish and seeking a transfer to Yavatmal because she has a family there and probably she finds it difficult to carry on at Darwha as a handicapped person living alone. In the circumstances, we disapprove of the observations of the Divisional Commissioner and vacate the stay granted by him on 22/11/2011. The respondent no.2 Divisional Commissioner shall decide the petitioner's representation expeditiously

¶16

0903wp1120.12

¶17

3/3

¶18

according to law and circumstances of the case. Order accordingly. The petition is disposed of.

¶19

Copy of this order be given to the learned

¶20

Assistant Government Pleader.

¶21

JUDGE

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

khj

Sau. Saheba Sultana W/O Ansar Abdul v. State of Mah. Thr. Its Principal Secty. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sau. Saheba Sultana W/O Ansar Abdul v. State of Mah. Thr. Its Principal Secty. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Mah. Thr. the Secty. and 3 Ors. Vs M.J. Bharsakale, Retd. Police Hawaldar

Muslim Education Society, Thr. Secretary Maulana Azad Urdu High School and Junior College of Scienc Vs the Eduction Officer (Secondary), Wardha and Anohter

Dr. Chandraprakash Dattarao Khedkar Vs Union of India, Min. of Agriculture and Ors.

Shri Siddharth S/O Bhimrao Adhav Vs Shri Chandu S/O Lahuji Janbandhu, Divisional Secretary, Caste Tribe Sanghatna and 5 Others

Smt. Wasanti Wd/O Mansaram Nihite and Anr. Vs the Union of India Thr. Secretary, Department of Posts and 3 Others

Ravindranath Tagore Vidya Prasarak Mandal, through Its Secretary and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Education Department and Another