Chattisgarh High Court
Satish Kumar Sinha vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 5 August, 2022
Page 1 of 3
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 5279 of 2022
Satish Kumar Sinha, S/o Late Shri B. K. Sinha, Aged About 57 Years,
Working as Assistant Superintendent Collectorate Office Sarguja,
Ambikapur, R/o Pathak Colony, Jashpur, Tahsil and District- Jashpur,
Civil and Revenue, District- Jashpur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Revenue Department,
Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Commissioner Sarguja Division, Ambikapur, District- Sarguja
(C.G.)
3. The Collector Sarguja Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.)
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj K. Sinha, Advocate.
For State : Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Order on Board
05.08.2022
1. The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition against
inaction on the part of respondents No. 1 & 2, by which the
representation of the petitioner regarding posting him in office of
Collector, Jashpur against the vacant post of Superintendent of
office of Collector, Surguja, is pending consideration. Learned
counsel for the petitioner would submit that vide order dated
21.12.2021 (Annexure P/2), he has been promoted on the
posted of Superintendent and posted at District Office, Surguja.
2. In pursuance of the promotion order, the petitioner has joined
District Office, Surguja, thereafter, he has made representation
on 03.02.2022 (Annexure P/4) before respondent No. 2 for
posting him at Jashpur and Collector, Jashpur has also issued
no objection for his posting at Jashpur. The representation of the
petitioner dated 03.02.2022 is still pending consideration.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the
petitioner is handicapped, his sister is mentally ill and he has to
take her to Ranchi for treatment every month and his mother is
unwell of aged about 75 years. He would further submit that due
to his personal difficulties, he has already made representation
for transferring him to Jashpur, which has not been reached to a
logical end.
4. It is well settled principle of law that the personal difficulties of a
person can be looked into by the employer. Hon'ble the Supreme
Court in SK Nausad Rahaman & others Vs. Union of India &
others1, has held at paragraph 53 as under:-
"53. In considering whether any modification of the
policy is necessary, they must bear in mind the
need for a proportional relationship between the
objects of the policy and the means which are
adopted to implement it. The policy above all has to
fulfill the test of legitimacy, suitability, necessity and
of balancing the values which underlie a decision
making process informed by constitutional values.
Hence, while upholding the judgment of the
Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, they leave
it open to the respondents to revisit the policy of
accommodate posting of spouses, the needs of the
disabled and compassionate grounds. Such
exercise has to be left within the domain of the
executive, ensuring in the process that
constitutional values which underlie Articles 14, 15
and 16 and Article 21 of the Constitution are duly
protected.
5. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the
1 Civil Appeal No. 1243 of 2022 (Decided on 10.03.2022)
petitioner, the personal difficulties raised by the petitioner in the
representation as well as the law laid down by Hon'ble the
Supreme Court in SK Nausad Rahaman (Supra), it is directed
that the respondent authorities shall decide the representation of
the petitioner, which is already pending, within an outer limit of
six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if it has
not been decided.
6. With the aforesaid directions, the instant writ petition stands
disposed of.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Arun
