Full Judgment
Dolly Smith versus State & ORS.W.P.No.16968/2012 16/10/2012 Shri Maneesh Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, learned P.L.for the respondents/State.
Petitioner is working as a Gramin Mahila Swasth Karyakarta in Sub-Health Center Patan, Tahsil Shyampur, District-Sihore and by the impugned order dated 13.7.2012 Annexure-P6, she has been transferred to another health Center in the same district in Tahsil Semli.
It is stated by the petitioner that on the particular date, when the Respondent Nos.5 & 6 marked absent of the petitioner, she made a complaint against Respondent Nos.5 & 6 to the Women Commission and contending that Respondent Nos.5 & 6 have influenced the transfer, petitioner challenged the order of transfer.
In support of the aforesaid contention, a complaint made by the petitioner to the State Women Commission is filed as Annexure-P5.
Shri Dharmadhikari submits that merely because the petitioner has made a complaint that also against Respondent Nos.5 & 6 who are only M.P.W.or an NuRs.and as there is no material to show that the order of transfer is tented with malafides and it is not known as to how and in what manner, Respondent Nos.5 & 6 have influenced the order of transfer, interference into the matter is not warranted.
It is emphasized by Shri Dharmadhikari that merely on the basis of the vague allegations and on the assumption, the allegations of malafides cannot be established.
Accordingly, Shri Dharmadhikari submits that the petition is liable to be dismissed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, thereafter, submits that the transfer of the petitioner is not on any administrative consideration and Dolly Smith versus State & ORS.by pointing out various personal inconveniences, challenge is made to the order of transfer.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that the grounds of malafides raised are not established from the material available on record.
Merely on the basis of certain complaint filed by the petitioner before the State Women Commission, allegations of malafide raised cannot be established.
As the grounds raised by the petitioner with regard to malafide are not substantially established from the material available on record, I see no reason to interfere into the matter.
Petitioner has also referred to a communication made by the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Commission in the matter of posting by referring to Annexure-P7.
These are documents, which are to be considered by the competent authority of the department and a decision taken.
As the representation of the petitioner is already pending before the competent authority, the said authority is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of four weeks.
With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.
Certified Copy as per rules.
(Rajendra Menon) Judge nd