An employer should be sympathetic to an employee’s medical conditions when considering his representation against a transfer order: High Court of Uttarakhand
When an employee had filed representation against a transfer order due to a serious medical condition, the employer be sympathetic while considering the representation filed and the employee must not be transferred until the representation has been duly considered. This was held by a two member bench of the High Court of Uttarakhand consisting of Chief Justice Raghavendra Singh Chauhan and Justice Alok Kumar Verma in the case of Ravindra Kumar v State of Uttarakhand [Writ Petition (S/B) No. 250 of 2021] on 22nd July 2021. The petitioner, Ravindra Kumar is an employee of respondent No.3. Through the present petition he challenged the legality of the transfer order dated 24th June 2021 passed by respondent No. 2, whereby the petitioner was transferred from Dehradun to Bageshwar on a promotional post. The petitioner pointed out that he was suffering from severe back problems which were clear from the medical reports indicating straightening of lumbar spine, degenerative changes in the form of osteophytes, disc desiccation and modic type II endplate changes at multiple levels. Additionally the petitioner also suffered from diffuse disc bulge and significant narrowing of bilateral neral foraminas. The petitioner also submitted a medical certificate from Government Doon Medical College Hospital, Dehradun dated 13th July 2021 which stated that he was suffering from Bronchial Asthma and was advised for bed rest till 25th July 2021. It was contended that due to these medical conditions, the petitioner not only suffered immense pain but also inability to walk in a normal proper gait. The petitioner further contended that he had completed 58 years of service and he will have much difficulty in discharging his duties at Bageshwar where he would not have access to the necessary medical facilities. A representation had been filed by the petitioner, however despite the lapse of almost twenty days, it had not been considered by the respondents. For this reason the petitioner prayed that the respondents be directed to consider the petitioner’s representation in a sympathetic manner and to further ensure that he is posted only at a place where it will be easy for him to see the necessary medical facilities for his spinal problems.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Mr. RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN THE HON’BLE JUSTICE Mr. ALOK KUMAR VERMA WRIT PETITIONNO. 250 OF 2021 22ND JULY 2021 Ravindra Kumar and State of Uttarakhand and others. ….Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Ms. Prabha Naithani Advocate. Counsel for the respondents: Mr. Pandey Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. The Court made the following: JUDGMENT:With the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties this case is being decided at this stage itself. The petitioner has challenged the legality of the transfer order dated 24.06.2021 passed by respondent No. 2 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from District Dehradun to District Bageshwar on a promotional post. Ms. Prabha Naithani the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is suffering from backache problems. This is abundantly clear from the report of the Kailash Hospital which clearly indicates that the petitioner has mild straightening of lumbar spine. There are degenerative changes in the form of marginal osteophytes disc desiccation and modic type II endplate changes at multiple levels of lumbar spine. There is also diffuse disc bulge seen at L4 L5 causing mild narrowing of thecal sacand significant narrowing of bilateral neural foraminas. Due to these medical difficulties being suffered by the petitioner the petitioner continues to suffer both pain and inability to walk in a normal proper gait. Moreover according to the medical certificate issued by the Government Doon Medical College Hospital Dehradun dated 13.07.2021 presently the petitioner is suffering “Bronchial Asthama”. Therefore he has been advised for bed rest till 25th July 2021. The learned counsel further submits that in order to highlight the medical difficulties being faced and in order to highlight that he has already completed 58 years and that he will have difficulty in discharging his duties at Bageshwar the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 01.07.2021. However despite the lapse of almost twenty days the said representation has not been considered. Therefore she prays that the respondents be the petitioner’s sympathetically and to ensure that he is posted at a place where it will be easy for him to seek the medical facilities for his spinal problem. On the other hand Mr. Vikas Pandey the learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand informs this Court that the respondents will consider the petitioner’s representation within a period of one week. Therefore this Court directs respondent No. 3 to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 01.07.2021 in a sympathetic manner considering the spinal problems being suffered by the petitioner. Till the representation of the petitioner is decided the petitioner shall not be transferred to District Bageshwar. With these directions the petition stands disposed In sequel thereto pending application if any also stands disposed of. No order as to costs. of. RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN C.J.) ALOK KUMAR VERMA J.) Dated: 22nd July 2021 