AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P. Nayak, learned Standing counsel for the BTC representing all the
respondents herein.
The petitioner in WP(C) 3286/2021 is the wife of the petitioner in WP(C) 3287/2021. The wife is posted as Supervisor (C) at Jalah ICDS project,
whereas the petitioner in WP(C) 3287/2021 is posted as UDA-cum-Accountant in the office of CDPO, Kalaigaon ICDS project. The petitioners have
a son aged about 8 years and it is projected that the child is with the wife and he has been admitted in Brooklyn Mission School. It is further projected
that on the expiry of the then UDA-cum-Accountant of Jalah ICDS project, the husband had submitted a representation dated 02.06.2021 before the
Joint Director-cum-Chief Head of Department, Social Welfare, BTC requesting his transfer from office of CDPO, Kalaigaon ICDS Project to office
of CDPO, Jalah ICDS project so that he could be with his wife at the same place of posting. However, the competent authority i.e. the respondent
no.2 had passed an office order dated 30.06.2021, transferring the petitioner i.e. the wife to Kalaigaon ICDS project. Accordingly, the learned counsel
for the petitioner has submitted that the wife is comfortable at Jalah as their son has been admitted at a school there. It is also submitted that the
respondent authorities ought not to transfer the petitioner in WP(C) 3286/2021 when the prayer of the husband was to transfer him out to Jalah ICDS
project.
The learned Standing counsel for the BTC has submitted that not only the petitioner in WP(C) 3286/2021 has been transferred by order dated
30.06.2021, but subsequently an order dated 02.07.2021 has been passed to release the petitioner from the office of the CDPO, Jalah, ICDS project.
Considering the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as by the learned Standing counsel for the
respondents, the Court deems it fit and appropriate that the competent authority i.e. the respondent no.2 shall consider the representation submitted by
the petitioner in WP(C) 3286/2021 namely, Maramee Medhi on 07.07.2021 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) and dispose of the same within a period
of 10 days from the date of being furnished with a downloaded copy of this order. It is made clear that the respondent no.2 may at his discretion verify
the order from the website of the Court and he would act in accordance with law on the basis of downloaded copy of this order.
Before parting with the records, it is made clear that although the Court is not expressing any opinion in the matter, but the authorities may relook
into the matter with a humane angle and to see if the child and the mother can be retained in the same place of posting.
At the stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that in the event, the respondent no.2 considers the representation dated
07.07.2021 of the wife, the husband is ready and willing to forego his prayer for transfer to place of posting of his wife upto the end of this financial
year and/or annual year, whenever the government takes up the issue of transfer and posting of the employees.
In view of the such submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) 3287/2021, we permit the said petitioner to also submit a
representation before the respondent no.2 so that both the representations of the husband and wife can be considered together. Till the disposal of the
representation, the respondents shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner in WP(C) 3286/2021.
Both the writ petitions stands disposed of.