P.P.BHATT, J. - (1.) PETITIONER , by way of filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has challenged the order of transfer issued by the respondents dated 8.7.2006, which was issued after the instruction received from the Under Secretary of the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi to the Civil Surgeon, Godda.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner, while referring Annexure -9 to the petition i.e. a letter issued by the Under Secretary of the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi to the Civil Surgeon, Godda dated 8.7.2006, submitted that one Smt. Champa Devi working with the Primary Health Centre, Meharama, Godda gave an application making grievance against the present petitioner and on the basis of the said application, Civil Surgeon was asked to transfer the present petitioner. On account of this instruction, issued by the Government vide Annexure -11 i.e. transfer order dated 8.8.2006, the petitioner was transferred. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the transfer order issued by the respondents is nothing but victimization of the present petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that other similarly situated employees are also working under the respondents for the last so many years and they have not been transferred and therefore, it cannot be said that petitioner's transfer was made on account of administrative exigencies. It is also submitted that after considering the facts and circumstances of the present petition, ad interim relief was granted in favour of the petitioner by staying the order of transfer. Learned counsel for the petitioner lastly submitted that transfer order may be quashed and set aside.
(3.) LEARNED Additional Advocate General appearing for the State submitted that the petitioner's transfer order came to be issued on account of administrative exigencies; there is no malafide in the transfer of the petitioner. It is further pointed out that this petition was filed in the year 2006 challenging the order of transfer and the said transfer order has been stayed by this Court and therefore, the petitioner continued on the said post despite issuance of transfer order for a period of more than five years by now. It is submitted that transfer is incidental in the service and usually takes place after the interval of 3 to 4 years upon the administrative exigencies arises in the department. However, if the petitioner will be asked to make representation, respondent -authorities will consider the same objectively.;