Dr. Divakar Rangary vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6038 Chatt
Judgement Date : 27 September, 2022

Chattisgarh High Court
Dr. Divakar Rangary vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 September, 2022
                                      1

                                                                      NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                           WA No. 528 of 2022

Dr. Divakar Rangary S/o Shri Dhan Singh Rangary Aged About 49 Years
Occupation Doctor, Medical Specialist Class I, Medicine Department,
Attached To Office Of Chief Medical And Health Officer, Jagdalpur, R/o
House No. 2, Vaishali Nagar, Kamla College Road, Ranjandgaon,
District: Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh
                                                               ---- Appellant
                                    Versus
1.     State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Governmenmt of
       Chhattisgarh Department of Health And Family Welfare,
       Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District:
       Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2.     Director Health Services Government of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati
       Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District: Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3.     Chief Medical And Health Officer Rajnandgaon, District:
       Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh
4.     Civil Surgeon- Cum- Chief Hospital Superintendent Rajnandgaon,
       Chhattisgarh
5.     Chief Medical And Health Officer Bastar, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh
6.     Civil Surgeon-Cum- Chief Hospital Superintendent District Hospital,
       Sukuma, Chhattisgarh
                                                          ---- Respondents

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Astha Shukla, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari, Judge Judgment on Board Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice 27.09.2022 Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. Astha Shukla, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents.

2

2. This writ appeal is presented against an order dated 13.07.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No.4847 of 2022.

3. The appellant, while holding the post of Medical Specialist, was suspended on 12.10.2009 and a departmental enquiry was initiated on 05.01.2010. After placing the appellant under suspension, his headquarter was fixed in the office of Chief Medical and Health Officer, Bastar, Jagdalpur.

4. By an order dated 31.05.2022, the suspension order of the appellant was revoked and he was posted in District Hospital, Sukma until further orders.

5. By filing the writ petition, the appellant prayed for quashing of the aforesaid order dated 31.05.2022 so far as it relates to his transfer to District Hospital, Sukma. A prayer was also made to post him to District Hospital, Rajnandgaon.

6. The learned Single Judge, considering the materials on record, directed the State Government to make an endavour to complete the enquiry proceeding within an outer limit of one year from the date of production of copy of the order. It was also provided that the appellant shall be allowed to travel from Sukma to Rajnandgaon for participating in the enquiry and that the allowance for travelling be also paid to him. The learned Single Judge further observed that he is not inclined to interfere with the posting of the appellant after revocation of the order of suspension.

3

7. Mr. Kumar submits that the enquiry proceeding is going on in Rajnandgaon and if he is posted at District Hospital, Sukma, the same would create difficulty for him and he may not be able to take part in the enquiry proceedings. It is in that light, he submits that attending facts and circumstances warrant that after revocation of order of transfer, the appellant ought to have been posted at Rajnandgaon.

8. Ms. Shukla relies on the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

9. The learned Single Judge has duly taken care of the grievance expressed by the appellant that he might be handicapped in participating in the enquiry proceeding, by providing that the appellant may be allowed to travel from Sukma to Rajnandgaon for participating in the enquiry and that he shall be paid due allowances for the same.

10. In that view of ht matter, we find no good ground to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge and consequently, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost.

                       Sd/-                                     Sd/-
               (Arup Kumar Goswami)                   (Deepak Kumar Tiwari)
                    Chief Justice                            Judge
Anu