Smt. Kalpana Rachaik vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Rajiv Sharma, J.—Petitioner was appointed as Staff Nurse in the month of July, 1991 in Primary Health Centre, Kotkhai, District Shimla. She was posted as Staff Nurse in I.G.M.C. Shimla in the year 1992. She has undergone training programme in Phaco and Vitreo Retinal surgery at P.G.I. Chandigarh with effect from 1.2.2005 to 1.3.2005. Thereafter, she was posted in the Department of Ophthalmology to assist the surgeons/consultants in O.P.D./Wards/Operation Theatre. Professor and Head, Ophthalmology Department, wrote a letter on 20.4.2005 to Senior Medical Superintendent, I.G. Hospital to post the petitioner permanently in the Eye Operation Theater. Petitioner alongwith another Staff Nurse was placed at the disposal of Professor and Head, Department of Ophthalmology, I.G.M.C. Shimla on 11.12.2008. Petitioner was transferred to Civil Hospital, Rohru vide Annexure P-8 dated 8.4.2011. She submitted representation on 11.4.2011 on the basis of order dated 11.12.2008. It has come in the reply that the same has been rejected.

Mr. Dilip Sharma has strenuously argued that petitioner could not be transferred since she has obtained special training of one month with effect from 1.2.2005 to 1.3.2005 from P.G.I Chandigarh. He further argued that there is no Eye Surgeon in Civil Hospital, Rohru where the services of the petitioner could be utilized.

Mr. Vikas Rathore, learned Deputy Advocate General has vehemently argued that petitioner remained posted in Shimla for the last 18 years. He then argued that the post of Civil Surgeon is available in Civil Hospital, Rohru and the petitioner can assist him at Rohru. He further argued that this Court has passed directions in CWPIL No. 52/2009 for deputing staff in Civil Hospital, Rohru. He finally argued that the petitioner has no vested right to remain posted at one particular station since the cadre of Staff Nurse is State Cadre.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully.

Petitioner was posted as Staff Nurse in I.G.M.C. Shimla in the year 1992. She had been continuously working for the last 18 years. It is only in the larger public interest that the petitioner has been transferred from I.G.M.C. Shimla to Civil Hospital, Rohru.

Petitioner has obtained training of one month. The Eye Surgeon at Civil Hospital, Rohru will definitely require the services of the petitioner on the basis of her one month�s training. The endeavour of the State Government should be to make the Hospitals in interior also self-sufficient so as to reduce the burden of the I.G.M.C., Shimla. The representation made by the petitioner has been duly considered and the same has been rejected by the respondent-department. The people of the Rohru area are also entitled to basic health facilities. It is for the employer where a particular incumbent is to be posted. The transfer is a condition of service and the incumbent, who has been transferred, must obey the transfer order in larger public interest. The scope of judicial review in such like matters is very limited. It is only in those cases where there is any infraction of mandatory provisions of law or mala fide is alleged, the Court may interfere. In the instant case, neither any infraction of mandatory provisions of law has been pointed out by the petitioner nor has any mala fide been alleged in the entire petition. The petitioner stood relieved of her duties on 8.4.2011 and had been working here only due to interim order passed by this Court on 6.5.2011.

This Court had taken a cognizance of the news item highlighting therein the difficulties faced by the residents of Rohru and surrounding areas due to lack of doctors and infrastructure. Civil Hospital, Rohru caters the need of three Tehsils, i.e. Rohru, Chirgaon and Jubbal of District Shimla. This hospital is visited by 700-800 persons daily. This Court in CWPIL No. 52/2009 had directed the District Judge, Shimla to visit Civil Hospital, Rohru and file the report vide order dated 29.3.2011. He visited the spot on 11.5.2010. He stated in the report about the shortage of doctors and paramedical staff in Civil Hospital, Rohru. Accordingly, the Eye Surgeon was posted in Civil Hospital, Rohru. Additional District Judge was also directed to file the report vide order dated 9.11.2011. He inspected Civil Hospital, Rohru on 12.12.2011. According to him, the Ophthalmologist/ Eye surgeon has been recently transferred. The Court is of the considered view that the post of Eye Surgeon is required to be filled up in Civil Hospital, Rohru, which has already been duly sanctioned.

The Court can take judicial notice of the fact that as and when doctors and para-medical staff are posted in the interior, there is tendency on their part not to resume the duties. This attitude of the doctors and para-medical staff severely affects the health of the people of the State, more particularly, in interior areas. Every citizen has right to get best medical services and the same cannot be confined at few places.

Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed. Interim order 6.5.2011 is vacated. Respondent-State is directed to post Eye-Surgeon in Civil Hospital, Rohru, within a period of two weeks from today. The petitioner is directed to join her duties at the new place of posting. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs.