- (1.)THE present petition impugns the validity of the transfer order dated 10-1-2008 (Annexure P/10), whereby the petitioner was transferred from Regional Head quarters, Baikunthpur to Sub-region Jhilimili, on the same post and same pay scale. The petitioner further seeks a relief that the respondents No. 3, 4 and 5 be restrained to take any coercive steps against the petitioner during her service period.
(2.)THE facts, as averred, in the petition are that the petitioner is a Tribal lady working as Category-1 employee in the South Eastern Coalfields Limited and was posted at Baikunthpur, District Korea (CG ). After death of her husband, the petitioner got married with one Mr. Manoj Kumar. The petitioner made an application dated 8-11-2007 (Annexure P/2) to the respondent No. 3 for incorporating the name of Mr. Manoj kumar as husband of the petitioner after deleting the name of her deceased husband. The respondent No. 3 demanded a bribe of Rs. 20,000/- for doing the needful. A complaint to that effect was lodged with Police station, Baikunthpur, on 13-11-2007 (Annexure P/3 ). As a consequence, the respondent No. 3 passed the order on the same day i. e. , 13-11-2007 (Annexure P/4)transferring the petitioner from Regional Head quarters, Baikunthpur to Sub-region, Charcha West, on the same post and same pay scale. The said order was immediately stayed on 15-11-2007 (Annexure P/5 ). The petitioner was relieved on 14-11-2007. Consequently, a charge-sheet dated 15-11-2007 was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted her reply on 17-11-2007 (Annexure P/6 ). The respondent no. 5 was nominated as Enquiry Officer and the enquiry commenced on 30-11-2007. Subsequently, the impugned order dated 10-1-2008 (Annexure P/10), transferring the petitioner from Regional Head Quarters, baikunthpur to Sub-region, Jhilimili on the same post and same pay scale, was passed which is under challenge in this petition.
(3.)LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned transfer order is bad on account of the fact that the respondent No. 3 has malice towards the petitioner on account the fact that the respondent No. 3 has demanded a sum of Rs. 20,000/- for entering the name of her second husband in the service records and for the same the petitioner has lodged a complaint with the Police Station, Baikunthpur, against the respondent No. 3. Thus, the impugned order dated 10-1-2008 is a mala fide exercise of power. Learned counsel further submits that sequence of events clearly indicates that the impugned order was passed by way of punishment for raising the voice against the respondent no. 3. A departmental enquiry initiated against the petitioner is pending consideration.
;