Gauhati High Court
Arun Ch. Richi Das vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 4 February, 2019
Author: N. Kotiswar Singh
Bench: N. Kotiswar Singh
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010019212019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C) 663/2019
1:ARUN CH. RICHI DAS
SON OF LATE MADHU RICHI DAS, R/O. VILLAGE AND P.O. AMRIKHOWA,
P.S. SARTHEBARI, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781307.
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.
2:THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES ASSAM
HENGRABARI
GUWAHATI-36.
3:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES
BARPETA
P.O. AND DIST.- BARPETA
ASSAM. PIN- 781301.
4:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES
SIVSAGAR
DIST.- SIVSAGAR
ASSAM
PIN- 785640.
5:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICER
NITYANANDA BLOCK PHC
BARPETA
P.O. AND DIST.- BARPETA
ASSAM. PIN- 781301.
6:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICER
KHELUA BLOCK PHC
DISTRICT- SIVSAGAR
Page No.# 2/4
ASSAM
PIN-785640.
7:MRINAL KR. SARMA
MULTI PURPOSE WORKER (MALE)
R/O.- VILL. NIZ KHANA
P.O. JALKHANA
DIST.- NALBARI
ASSAM
PIN- 781371
Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. B AHMED
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HEALTH
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH
ORDER
Date : 04-02-2019 Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A.K. Azad, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Issue notice, returnable within 3 (three) weeks.
3. Mr. D.P. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Health Department accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 6.
4. Petitioner shall take steps for service of notice upon the respondent No. 7 by registered post with A/D.
5. In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the transfer order dated 18.01.2019, by which the petitioner, who is presently serving as a Multi-Purpose Worker (Male) at Bongaon Sub-Centre under Nityananda Block PHC under the Joint Director, Health Services, Barpeta has been transferred in the same capacity to Ekorani Sub-Centre under Khelua Block PHC under the Joint Director of Health Services, Sivasagar.
6. The main challenge rests on the contention of the petitioner that this post is not transferable beyond the district to which a Multi Purpose Worker (Male) had been appointed.
Page No.# 3/4
7. In this connection, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner has referred to the Guidelines for appointment to the post of Multi Purpose Worker (Male) issued by Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Delhi. Para No. 4 of the Guidelines lay down the eligibility and the selection criteria stipulating that the applicant should be a resident of any of the villages with the Gram Panchayat and in the event of non-availability of such local candidates, the candidates from any of the villages in the adjoining Gram Panchayat, and failing which from the Block, may be considered in that order.
8. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further submits that on an earlier occasion when certain controversy arose as to the transferability of the incumbents to the post of MPW(M) in IA(C) 1708/2018 in WP(C) No. 906/2018, the authorities clarified the matter by issuing an Office Memorandum on 2 nd January, 2019 in which it has been specifically mentioned that the services of Multi Purpose Workers (Male) are transferrable from one Sub- Centre to another Sub-Centre in the interest of public service.
9. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner, accordingly, submits that the scheme as evident from the guidelines for appointment as well as the Office Memorandum would clearly indicate that the appointment is Sub-Centre specific and is only transferable from one Sub- Centre to anther Sub-Centre within the same District. It has been accordingly, contended that transfer of an MPW(Male) to another District would be contrary to the Guidelines as well as their own Office Memorandum.
10. Keeping into account the nature and method of appointment of the MPW(Male) and also clarification made by the State authorities in their Office Memorandum dated 02.01.2019, this Court is also of the prima-facie view that the post of Multi Purpose Worker (Male) is to be appointed from the village concerned and that the preference for appointment to the said post would be given to the resident of the village, failing which from any village of the adjoining Gram Panchayat, and failing which from the Block. It does not mention of appointment from another district.
It is thus indicative of the fact that the appointee should ordinarily be a resident of the Sub-Centre.
11. Further, the scope of transfer has been also circumscribed by their own Office Memorandum dated 02.01.2019, in which, it has been provided that the services of the Multi Page No.# 4/4 Purpose Worker can be transferred from one Sub-Centre to another Sub-Centre in the interest of public service. The rule making authorities chose not to provide for transfer from one district to another. If that was the conscious decision of the authorities to confine the transfer from one Sub-Centre to another Sub-Centre only, by implication the transfer cannot be effected to another District. Accordingly, this Court also expect that the authorities should abide by their own guidelines and norms laid down, failing which, it may amount of violation of Article 14 of the constitution, being arbitrary.
12. It has been submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, Health Department appearing for the State respondents that the private respondent has been released and joined the new place of posting.
13. However, considering the fact that the petitioner has been able to make out a prima- facie case for interference, this Court has no option but to stay the impugned order dated 18.01.2019.
Accordingly, the same is stayed until further order of this Court.
14. Since, the impugned order is stayed, the petitioner may be allowed to continue to remain to work in Bongaon Sub-Centre under Nityananda Block PHC under the Joint Director, Health Services, Barpeta until further order of this Court.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant