Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Laxmi Kumari Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:8005) on 10 February, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:8005]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3577/2025
Laxmi Kumari Sharma W/o Sarvesh Dadhich, Aged About 32 Years,
Ward No. 40, Pratibha Nagar, Churu, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of
Medical And Health, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Additional Chief Secretary, Medical, Health And Family Welfare,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. The Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical And Health Services-
Cum- Additional Director (Admn.), Panchayati Raj. (Medical)
Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
4. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Churu, District Churu
(Raj.)
5. The Block Chief Medical Officer, Churu (Raj.).
6. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And
Panchayati Raj, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.R. Godara.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC with
Mr. Tanuj Jain & Mr. Vivek Sharma.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order (Oral)
10/02/2025
1. Yet again, another expectant mother--six months into her
pregnancy--is before this Court seeking judicial intervention as a
consequence of the State's sheer apathy and callous disregard for
basic human dignity. Assailed herein is an order dated 15.01.2025,
vide which, she has been transferred from Sub-Health Centre,
Kishnasar, Block Nokha, District Bikaner to Sub Centre Dheerwas,
Churu.
2. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the rival contentions
and perused the case file.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that transfer
contravenes Rule 8 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Raj (Transferred
Activities) Rules, 2011. He further contends that the petitioner, who
is at the advanced stage of her pregnancy, cannot be transferred at
this juncture due to her medical condition.
[2025:RJ-JD:8005] (2 of 2) [CW-3577/2025]
4. Per contra learned counsel for respondents argues that transfer
is an integral part of service conditions of a government employee
and the same arise out of the administrative exigencies. Therefore,
no indulgence is warranted by this Court.
5. At the outset, reference may be had to a judgment rendered by
this very bench Court in Jyoti Parmar Vs State Institute Of Health
And Family Welfare & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1422/2025
(decided on 23.01.2025) followed by another one in Sulochna Vs.
State of Raj. & Ors. : SBCWP No.1905/2025, decided on
28.01.2025. Reasons and discussion rendered therein be read as
part and parcel of order herein.
6. Reverting to the case in hand, if the petitioner is to comply with
the transfer order impugned herein, she will have to travel 400 kms
(200 kms each way) everyday, at this advance stage of her
maternity. Not only that, travel would also necessarily entail health
hazards for both mother as well as the infant, be it pre-natal or post-
natal.
7. In the premise, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned
transfer order dated 15.01.2025 is quashed. The respondents are
directed to retain her on her current posting to obviate a situation,
which is, to quote the statutory language- "likely to interfere with her
pregnancy or the normal development of the foetus, or is likely to cause her
miscarriage or otherwise to adversely affect her health so as to enable her to
discharge her duties without being fearful of losing her livelihood.
8. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J
20-Sumit/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
