Dr. Hariprakash Kanwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1 / 3

¶2

2024:CGHC:35152

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 5088 of 2024

¶6

1 - Shefali Kujur D/o Celvister Kujur Aged About 27 Years Presently Posted As Medical Officer, Grade-2, 20 Bed Hospital, Tapkara, District- Jashpur, C.G.

¶7

---- Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Health And Family Welfare Department, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, C.G.

¶10

2 - The Special Secretary Public Health And Family Welfare Department, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, C.G.

¶11

3 - The Commissioner Cum-Director Public Health Services, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, DistrictRaipur, C.G.

¶12

4 - The Divisional Joint Director Surguja Division, District- Ambikapur, C.G.

¶13

---- Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr. Amitesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L.

¶15

WPS No. 5098 of 2024

¶16

1 - Dr. Hariprakash Kanwar S/o Shri Mahajan Singh Kanwar Aged About 38 Years Medical Officer At Community Health Centre, Dipka, District Korba (C.G.)

¶17

---- Petitioner

¶18

Versus

¶19

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Special Secretary, Public Health And Family Welfare Department, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.)

¶20

2 - The Director Health Services Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar,

¶21

2 / 3

¶22

District Raipur (C.G.)

¶23

3 - The Chief Medical And Health Officer Korba, District Korba (C.G.)

¶24

4 - The Block Medical And Health Officer Block Katghora, District Korba (C.G.)

¶25

5 - Dr. Sefali Kujur Medical Officer, 20 Bed Hospital, Tapkara, District Jashpur (C.G.)

¶26

---- Respondents

¶27

For Petitioner : Mr. A. S. Rajput, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L.

¶28

Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

¶29

Order on Board

¶30

09/09/2024

¶31

Challenge in these petitions is to a transfer order dated 14.08.2024 by which the petitioner in WPS. No. 5098/2024 has been transferred to 20 Bed Hospital, Tapkara, District- Jashpur from his present place of posting i.e. Community Health Centre, Dipka District- Korba (C.G.) in place of the petitioner in WPS No. 5088/2024.

¶32

Leaned counsel for the petitioner in WPS No. 5088/2024 submits that the petitioner is working on contract basis therefore the petitioner cannot be transferred.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner in WPS No. 5098/2024 submits that by the impugned order the petitioner has been transferred in the place of Dr. Shefali Kujur petitioner in WPS. No. 5088/2024 as such she being a contract employee cannot be transferred in place of petitioner, therefore, this transfer order cannot be executed.

¶34

On earlier date of hearing, the learned counsel for respondent State was directed to seek instruction. On instruction Ms. Trivedi submits that so far as Dr. Shefali Kujur petitioner in WPS. No. 5088/2024 is a contract employee, in that regard, the respondents may be permitted to file return. However, she submits that so

¶35

3 / 3

¶36

far as Dr. Hariprakash Kanwar petitioner in WPS No. 5098/2024 is concerned, his transfer order is passed on administrative exigency.

¶37

I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available on record.

¶38

The petitioners in both the cases have been interchanged by virtue of the transfer order dated 14.08.2024. But the fact remains that petitioner Dr. Shefali Kujur petitioner in WPS. No. 5088/2024 is a contract employee and as such she cannot be transferred and until and unless, she is disturbed from her present place of posting, Hariprakash Kanwar petitioner in WPS No. 5098/2024 cannot join the transferred place. Let this anomaly be rectified by the State and the petitioners are permitted to make a representation to respondent No. 1 within ‘10 days ’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On such representation is made, the respondent No. 1 shall decide the same either himself or place it before the committee constituted in light of policy of State Government dated 12.08.2022 and take decision within an outer limit of ‘ 45 days’ from the presentation of representation in accordance with the relevant rules and law applicable to the case of petitioners. Interim order granted earlier to operate till then.

¶39

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. All the pending applications if any are also disposed of.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

(Sachin Singh Rajput)

¶42

JUDGE

¶43

H.Ansari

Dr. Hariprakash Kanwar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Hariprakash Kanwar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ganesh Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohan Krishna Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anupama Saraugi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Devashish Kurre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shiksha Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh