High CourtsSingle Bench(2020) 03 RAJ CK 0083

Gayatri Devi vs State of Rajasthan, through the Secretary, Department Of Medical And Health and Others

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 19 March 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vijay Bishnoi, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 3932 Of 2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 334 words
1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The petitioner, who is working as Auxiliary Nurse Midwifery (ANM) in the Health Department of Churu District, has challenged the order dated

29.9.2019 passed by the

3.

Additional Director (Admn.), Medical & Health Services, Jaipur, Rajasthan whereby, the services of the petitioner along with several other similar

employees were transferred from the Department of Medical & Health Services to the Panchayati Raj Institutions.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order impugned dated 29.9.2019 has already been quashed and set aside by a Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 15.1.2020 passed in SB Civil Writ Petition No.14964/2019 (Kiran Kumari v. State of Rajasthan) along with

several other writ petitions while holding that the action of the State Government of transferring the services of the employees of the Medical &

Health Department, particularly, the services of Auxiliary Nurse Midwifery (ANM) to the Panchayati Raj Institutions is not in consonance with the

prevalent rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the

decision rendered in Kiran Kumari's case (supra).

5.

Learned counsel Mr. Surendra Singh Gaguda, AGC appearing for the respondent-State is not in a position to dispute the said position.

6.

It is also informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the impugned order dated 29.9.2019, the petitioner has not been relieved as

she is on maternity leave of 180 days from 27.9.2019 and aforesaid the leave period is going to be expired on 24.3.2020.

7.

In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Kiran Kumari's case

(supra).

8.

However, it is made clear that if the petitioner has not been relieved and has not joined at the place where she has been transferred pursuant to the

impugned order dated 29.9.2019, then only, she is entitled for the aforesaid relief.