Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
V Vincent Joy vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 21 February, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:10647]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4694/2025
V Vincent Joy S/o I A. Varghese, Aged About 52 Years, Resident
Of House No. 3/214 Tripura Colony Theekariya Banswara
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Joint Secretary, The
Department Of Medical And Health Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, (Nongazette) The Department Of Medical
And Health Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. District Hospital Banswara, Rajasthan Through Principal.
4. Chief Medical Health Officer, Banswara Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ripudaman Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC
with Mr. Tanuj Jain
and Mr. Vivek Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order (Oral)
21/02/2025
1. Grievance of the petitioner, who is working as Junior
Assistant, is against an order dated 15.01.2025 (Annex.2), vide
which he has been transferred from District Hospital, Banswara to
District Hospital, Salumber, which is stated to be about 100 kms.
away on the ground that he is suffering from chronic kidney
disease and regular treatment (hemo dialysis) going on at
Banswara.
2. Heard.
[2025:RJ-JD:10647] (2 of 3) [CW-4694/2025]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner
suffers from chronic kidney disease and is currently under bi-
weekly Hemo-dialysis at a hospital in Banswara and also has to
frequently travel to Geetanjli Hospital at Udaipur to consult the
Nephrologist. His life is thus, under serious risk in case he has to
join at the place of transfer, i.e. Salumber, which is stated to be 80
km. away. He will have to necessarily travel 160 kms. everyday to
remain present in Banswara for his continued treatment/dialysis.
He points out that at Salumber, no facility of dialysis is available.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents, who appears on
advance service of copy of petition, submits that the petitioner
had earlier also approached this Court with the same very grounds
and had withdrawn the petition with liberty to file appropriate
representation. He submits that instead of filing representation, he
has preferred this second petition with the same cause of action,
which is not maintainable.
5. Apropos, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no
doubt he was counsel in the earlier petition and he had withdrawn
the same to file a representation but the same was under
mistaken information of seeking a remedy qua violation of Rule
8(iii) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Transferred Activities)
Rules, 2011. Subsequently, in light of the judgment rendered by
this Court in the case of Rajesh Sharma Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3804/2024,
decided on 05.02.2025, he realized that such a representation will
be an exercise in futility.
6. Having heard rival contentions, I am of the view that given
the peculiar medical condition of the petitioner, he deserves
[2025:RJ-JD:10647] (3 of 3) [CW-4694/2025]
humanitarian treatment and in the premise, the competent
authority is directed to take a fresh look at his transfer order and
as far as possible, accommodate him at Banswara either on
alternative post or on the same post so as not to cause disruption
in his continuous treatment of Hemo-dialysis. If the petitioner
cannot be accommodated at Banswara, he should be given posting
at a nearby place where dialysis facility is available.
7. Needful be done within a period of 30 days upon approaching
the petitioner with the web-print of the instant order.
8. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
9. All pending application (s), if any, shall also stand disposed
of.
(ARUN MONGA),J
26-SP/skm/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
