07.07.2010.
Shri Narendra Sharma for the petitioner.
Shri Puneet Shroti, Panel Lawyer, for the respondents on
advance notice.
Challenging the order-dated 15.6.2010 by which the
petitioner, a lady ANM, has been transferred from Primary Health
Centre, Pandukhedi (Sukhtawa) to Primary Health Centre Khoksar
(Dolariya) in the District of Hoshangabad.
Contending that the transfer is contrary to the transfer policy
of the State Government, petitioner has been elected as President of
an employees union and, therefore, for two consecutive sessions
she cannot be transferred as per the policy – Annexure P/6 dated
20.4.2010, petitioner seeks interference into the matter. The only
ground canvassed at the time of hearing was the aforesaid breach of
policy condition.
Shri Puneet Shroti, learned counsel for the respondents,
invites my attention to the policy in question and points out that
under the policy and Clause 9.21 thereof, immunity from transfer is
only granted to such office bearers, who hold the post of President
and Secretary of a State Level or District Level Union and not a
Block or Tehsil Level Union of which the petitioner is an office
bearer. Accordingly contending that the policy in question is not
breached in the case of the petitioner, Shri Shroti prays for
dismissal of this petition.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal
of Clause 9.21 of the policy, it is clear that immunity from transfer
is available to recognized Unions, which have been granted benefit
2
of correspondence with the State Government and office bearers of
such a Union holding post in the State or District Level Committee
are only granted exemption. There is nothing in this circular to
indicate that persons like the petitioner, who are office bearers of a
Tehsil or Block Level Unit of the Union, are also protected. As
such, there is no breach of the policy conditions, as alleged.
That apart, as the transfer is from one Primary Health Centre
to another in the same District, this Court does not find any ground
to interfere in the matter.
Accordingly, finding no case for interference, the petition is
dismissed.
(RAJENDRA MENON)
JUDGE
Aks/-