High Court Karnataka High Court

Veerabasamma vs The Government Of Karnataka on 29 May, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Veerabasamma vs The Government Of Karnataka on 29 May, 2008
Author: Ajit J Gunjal

i

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAEA,

‘ DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MA¥;A.éDt3gAEALEE%j IE:

k5i:}E*'{,31{.i_:}m,V

THE HDNELE MR. JDsT:EE

WRIT PETITION I~1″::;3g-. 3 1643 2e.05Ej@(E3EE
BETWEEN * J %
1 VEEKABASAMMA _
wgo BALLQDAPPA – _

46 YRS, CI_{L{Lf
R/O E

LI’1\1{“3.’&;’§§’iJF.R.,«:’:i*5*311′:IC1?.VifVt,Tf€A’ ‘

(Ey Sri PATH_;,’AV.ADV«;EE’A

AN Dig”

% % A .1 A GDVEENEAEM’ OF KARNATAKA.

. A A REPS? PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
~ . ‘W-Q;M_EN-AND CHILD WELFARE DEPT
V V EA;~;GALx_>:<E

2 M TEE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND

A CEEILD WELFARE DEPARTMENT
_ ~,w1Am'RALAYA ROAD
A ~1<A¢cE:_u<

% THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

LIN GASU K
HA1(_1HUK

4 SMT GOURAMMA

PETITIONER.

W] O LATE SHARANAPPA
R] O CHIKKAHESARUR
L1N(.}A§3L3R, RAJLEHUK

A A

(By Sri BASAVARAJ KAREDDY, – 1) 2 ‘

THIS w.P. FILED UNDER}3.RTICLES*».2Q6″AND 227 OF
THE C1ONSTI’1’U’1’1ON, PRAYING=_ TO QIJASH THE ORDER
J.)”‘i”i.). 2.5.2006, vAssj::;3_ m’.%%’i*w::[%:<2'%.3x:m: Aux-<3, so mm
H' REL-ATES TO POSTINC3 3-TO CHIKKAHESARUR
VILLAGE IN L-INGASUR _TAL[Ii{"WHI,{3H;.1S_'_.NOT HER PLACE
<_)§«'K12:S1_L)1::;\1<_::»;,- "

DIF_ECT§*–.fFI-fig':*?{}CQi'I?3.fi§i§';R" THE CASE OF THE
Pusrrrzomgg-2 TgC)'i _P'i3% H312' "re. HER PLACE OF RESIDENCE

TO CHIKKI \r1:gL_AGE:L;1&: "LINGASUR TAL-UK,.

THIS" PI:?:*1'*§51c$:~: on FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARIANG5 IN 'B.' iZ'§}:?f.)¥;I§"TEi1S DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWIIGG; -%

' A ….. ..«'{_)RL)ER

V VA " was appointsd as Anganwadi worker at

in Lingasugur Taluk. The date of

is 24.11: 1988. Sufiice it to say, r6sponde..nt-4

' iiroxxx Harvapur in Manvi Taluk to Hogaranal

yifiage in Sindhanom' taluk on 8.6.1993. RespondeI1t~4

' reported to duty at Hogamnal Village. 011 3. request made by

res-poI1dc:nt–4, she was transfcrmd to Chikkahcsarur

/

Limgasugur Taiuk. The said order of

in this writ petition. _ ' ~

2. Learned oounsol appearing _for.__1;hc _’pc1 3’i’ioncr sggbmitooé

that the transfier of rcspondo11:«4_’_A[ to
Chikkahosarur is without
submits that the petitioner vas..~§Lnga11awadi
Karyakarto who Saxjapur and

Chikkahosarux’ !:gi1s?j}2j;:1:§.?fS”fI:sido1″;c:o.

3, A;f;rparoiit1§?V, I’!3t;i.tion is wholly misconcoivori.

By the from Hogaranal village

to ‘:’f11§ pe.{itionor is not in any way displaced.

I :1« has been working at Saxjapur right

of her appoinozoont in the year 1988.

_ I1″:oir$.:=.1*11:s*;1:1’}3,;.::”‘ it is also to be noticed that the distance

.i§ett5zoo1i’S:a1japur and Chikkahosarur is hardly 4 kms.
_§iavi11g rogrcl to the fact that by the transfer of

.. :4’¥ff?+’§;p°¥l(Inct*4, the petitioner is not displaced, the question of

J

intcxfering with the said transfer erder docs ~ V.

Petition is rejected.

Mr. Khureshi, learned A.G.A. is ti}

appearancc within flour weeks. _

van: