PRADEEP KUMAR KAUSHIK Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Correctness and sustainability of the impugned order dated 01.03.2021 passed in WPS No. 656/2021 is put to challenge in this appeal, whereby learned Single Judge declined to grant relief as sought for by the appellant, reserving right for filing a fresh representation seeking for a suitable place of posting to a NonScheduled Area.

(2.) Relevant facts for disposal of this appeal are that the appellant was initially appointed on the post of Pharmacist Ayurved on 22.07.2013 and posted at Community Health Centre, Nangur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. He was transferred from Community Health Centre, Nangur to Primary Health Centre, Kaushalnaar, District Bijapur, Chhattisgarh vide order dated 15.09.2020 (Annexure A-4). Order of transfer was put to challenge in Writ Petition (s) No. 3995/2020, which was disposed of vide order dated 08.10.2020, permitting the petitioner to file representation before the Competent Authority and till decision of the representation, interim protection of staying effect of order of transfer of the appellant has been passed in favour of the appellant. Representation filed by the appellant came to be rejected vide order dated 02.01.2021, stating therein that the order of transfer has been passed in accordance with the Transfer Policy after taking approval of the Co-ordination Committee and the transfer order is issued under administrative exigency. Order of rejection of representation was put to challenge in another writ petition as WPS No. 656/2021, which also came to be dismissed by the impugned order.

(3.) Mr. Ishan Verma, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge has not considered the ground raised by the appellant in proper manner, that as per the Circular issued by the State Government dated 03.06.2015, the appellant who has worked in scheduled area for a considerable period of time, should have been transferred in the non-scheduled area, the representation submitted by the appellant has been decided in a very mechanical manner and has not considered the representation filed by the appellant separately but the orders have been passed considering the representation filed by six of the employees. He further contended that in earlier round of litigation, in WPS No. 3995/2020, learned Single Judge considering the grounds raised by the appellant to be proper has given the interim protection. The identical issue came before the Division Bench of this Court in WA No. 549/2016 (Chonhas po v. State of Chhattisgarh), wherein the Hon'ble Division Bench has allowed the appeal and directed for posting of appellant therein in non-scheduled area, hence, the impugned order is liable to be interdicted.