Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 415 (ALL)

Nanak Chand Sharma v. Director General, Family Welfare

2004-02-27

RAKESH TIWARI

body2004
RAKESH TIWARI, J. ( 1 ) HEARD Counsel for the parties and perused the record. ( 2 ) THIS petition has been filed challenging the alleged order of transfer dated 12/14. 1. 2004. The petitioner is working as Health Supervisor in Primary Health Centre, Bisrakh, District Gautam budh Nagar. It appears from the counter affidavit that State of U. P. and others governmental and non-governmental organisation were actively participating in Pulse Polio Programme sponsored by WHO for its eradication from India. The petitioner had also given duty in aforesaid programme. ( 3 ) FROM the averments made in Para 7 of the counter affidavit, it appears that the monitoring body of the WHO, Gautam Budh Nagar, unit vide its report dated 10. 4. 2003 informed the CMO, gautam Budh Nagar, that the petitioner was responsible for the success of the aforesaid programme in his area, but instead of performing his duties himself his duty was perfomed by someone else by putting the alleged signatures of the petitioner. ( 4 ) AGAIN a complaint was made in November, 2003 by the WHO, Unit against the petitioner that he is not performing his duties in the aforesaid programme properly and had furnished false and fabricated data to the department. An enquriy was set up in the matter. After enquiry a detailed report was submitted in which it was found that the signatures of the petitioner on the doors/walls of the respective houses of the concerned village were forged and the same was not that of the petitioner. It was also stated in the report that the petitioner is habitual of doing such activities of not performing the duties properly and getting the same done through someone else. Disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner. On receipt of the report dated 12. 1. 2004, cmo, Gautam Budh Nagar issued an order dated 12. 1. 2004 attaching the petitioner in Primary health Centre, Jewar, Gautam Budh Nagar. ( 5 ) STANDING Counsel submits that the order of transfer could not be signed on 12. 1. 2004 as there was a urgent meeting of all the Chief Medical Officer with the Health Minister of U. P. at lucknow. He signed the order on 14. 1. 2004. 2004 attaching the petitioner in Primary health Centre, Jewar, Gautam Budh Nagar. ( 5 ) STANDING Counsel submits that the order of transfer could not be signed on 12. 1. 2004 as there was a urgent meeting of all the Chief Medical Officer with the Health Minister of U. P. at lucknow. He signed the order on 14. 1. 2004. In the meantime the District Gautam Budh Nagar was abolished on the night of 13th January, 2004 and as such the order passed after abolition of gautam Budh Nagar, is folly justified as it has been passed on 12. 1. 2004 and it is wholly immetarial that it was signed on 14. 1. 2004. ( 6 ) COUNSEL for the petitioner relies upon the GO dated 22. 2. 2003 providing that Health supervisor is district cadre post and there transfer is allowed within the district. As such the posting of the petitioner outside the district was against the GO. It is submitted that by the counsel for the petitioner that an order passed on 12. 1. 2004 but admittedly not signed is not an order which can be said to have been passed on 12. 1. 2004. ( 7 ) THE District Gautam Budh Nagar abolished on 13. 1. 2003 and signing of the order of transfer on 14. 1. 2003 subsequent to abolition of district was without authority. ( 8 ) FOR the reasons the order of transfer is not by a competent authority. The petition is allowed. No order as to costs. The competent authority is free to pass a legal order and this judgment wilt not affect pendency of such order. . .