Disposed

Prem Lata v. State

Himachal Pradesh HC13 Dec 2010CWP/7286/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a Female Health Worker, filed a writ to quash a transfer order and seek continued posting near her children's school in Riyagri. The court directed the authorities to consider the petitioner's representation and decide within a fortnight.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with direction to respondents to consider petitioner's representation and decide within a fortnight; interim order continued.

Prem Lata Vs State — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

CWP No. 7286 of 2010

¶4

Date of decision: 13^th December, 2010

¶5

Prem Lata ......Petitioner.

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Himachal Pradesh & others .....Respondents.

¶8

Coram

¶9

The Hon’ble Mr.Justice V.K. Sharma, J.

¶10

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No

¶11

For the petitioner: Mr. Tek Chand Sharma, Advocate. For respondent No. 1 & 2: Mr. Anil Jaswal, Deputy Advocate General.

¶12

V.K. Sharma, J. (oral)

¶13

The petitioner, who is working as Female Health Worker, was posted at Health Sub Center, Riyagri, District Mandi. Similarly, private respondent No. 3 who is also a Female Health Worker was posted at Health Sub Center, Sambol, District Mandi and was under transfer to Health Sub Center, Kutachi, District Mandi. However, vide office order dated 9.11.2010, Annexure P-1, private respondent No. 3 was adjusted at Health Sub Center, Riyagri, district Mandi vice the

¶14

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes.

¶15

¶16

petitioner. Being aggrieved the petitioner has filed the present petition on the following prayer:

¶17

“ (i)That the Office order dated 9^th Nov, 2010 vide which the petitioner has been ordered to be transferred from HSC Riyagri to HSC Kutachi as contained in Annexure P-1 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the petitioner may very kindly be permitted to work at the present place of posting i.e. HSC Riyagri Distt. Mandi till March, 2011 or in the alternative be given a station of posting near HSC Nasloh where her husband is presently posted as MHW under the respondent department.”

¶18

The respondents are yet to file replies. However, pursuant to the agreement between the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.

¶19

Undisputedly, the petitioner has since been relieved, though in absentia, and as a consequence thereof private respondent No. 3 has since joined at Health Sub Center, Riyagri, District Mandi. The only grievance raised by the petitioner is that both her children are school going and their academic session is going to end in the month of March, 2011 and till then she may be allowed to continue at Health Sub Center at Riyagri, district Mandi.

¶20

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents No. 1 and 2/Competent

¶21

¶22

Authority that subject to the petitioner making a representation within a week from today, the said respondents/Competent Authority shall consider the same and take final decision in the matter in accordance with law and justice within next fortnight, after hearing the petitioner and private respondent No. 3, if so desired. Till then interim order dated 23^rd November, 2010 shall continue.

¶23

In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending CMP(s), if any.

¶24

Copy dasti .

¶25

(V.K. Sharma), Judge.

¶26

December, 13, 2010 (KRS)

Prem Lata v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Lata v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parminder Kumar Vs State

Ruby Kaushal Vs State

Dharam Chand Vs State

Thakri Devi Vs State

Narender Kumar Vs State

Desh Raj Vs State