This Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a representation regarding a transfer order. Finding the belated representation was considered with due application of mind and reasons assigned, the Court held the petition lacked merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
SWGLE EERWH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT— BILASPUR WRIT pETITION (smo. Li 1gb OF 2009
OF 2009
PETITIONER
ASHIM MUKHERJEE,
AGED— 49 YEARS,
l
S/O LATE GOPAL CHANDRA MUKHERJEE, WORKING AS— MALE HEALTH WORKER, AT— COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER, TOKAPAL, DISTRICT - BASTER (C. G.) R/O TOKAPAL, DISTRICT — BASTER (C. G.)
VERSUS
RESPONDENTs : 1.
s
sTATE OF CHHATTIsGARH,
THROUGH— ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE, MANTRALAYA, D. K. s. BHAWAN, RAIPUR
CHIEF MEDICAL & HEAHLT OFFICER, JAGDALPUR, DISTRICT— BASTER (C. G.)
/ 3.
DISTRICT— BASTER (C. G.)
NWrit Petition under Article — 226 of the
Constitution of India.
NC,
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASNZIR
SB : HON’BLE SHRI JUS'HCE PRITINKER DXWAKER
W343} N0. 4155 [2009
PETITIONER Ashim Mukherjee
RESPONDENTS State of C.G. & Others
WET PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF TIE CONSTITUTION OF mDlA
Appearance:
Shri R.K.Kesharwani, counsel for the Detitioner. Ms. Sunita Jain, P.L, for the State/resgx No. 1 85 2.
ORAL ORDER
(07.03.2009)
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 24.7.2009 (Annexure P/ 1) passed by the respondent No.2 by which the representation of the petitioner against his transfer order dated 30.6.2009 has been rejected. Contention of counsel for the petitioner is that against his impugned transfer order dated 30.6.2009 he had filed W.P.(S) No. 3457/2009 and the same was withdrawn by him on 15.7.2009 with liberty to file representation before respondent No.2 and after the order of this Court, he had made a representation vide Annexure P/6 on 21.7.2009 but the same has been dismissed / Without application of mind and without considering the grievanceofthe petitionerasraisedbyhiminthewrit petition. A bare perusal of the impugied order dated 24.7.2009 shows that the representation of the petitioner has been rejected after due application of mind and after assigning the reason and therefore this Oourt is of the View that the present petition Iacks merit and the same is accprdingly dismissed at the motion stage itself.
Sd/-
Pritinker Diwaker ‘ r
Judge
§:/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the dismissal of the petitioner's representation against his transfer order without application of mind warrants judicial intervention.
Ashim Mukherjee
State of Chhattisgarh
Secretary, Department of Public Health & Family Welfare
Chief Medical & Health Officer, Jagdalpur
Shivshankar Yadav
Pritinker Diwaker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
