Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Smt. Navrangi Devi Pal And 13 Others v. Chief Medical Officer Varanasi & 2 Others - WRIT - A No. 2834 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 239 (24 January 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 9

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2834 of 2005

Smt. Navrangi Devi Pal & others


The Chief Medical Officer,

Varanasi & others

Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani, J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned standing counsel.

All the petitioners are serving as Matron, Sisters, Staff Nurse under the Directorate of Medical & Health Services, U.P. By the impugned orders, all the petitioners have been transferred within the City of Varanasi from one hospital to another. These orders have been issued in pursuance of the direction of this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37729 of 2004, between Rakesh Kumar Singh and State of U.P. & others decided on 16.9.2004 as well as in pursuance of the transfer policy of the State Government.

It was found by this Court in Contempt Petition No. 820 of 2002, between Rajesh Kumar Srivastava and A.P. Verma and others, that the Medical & Health Services provided by the State Government in the State of U.P. have totally collapsed. One of the main reasons was that the doctors and para medical staff were serving at a particular place for decades and thus a direction was issued on 28.1.2004 to the State Government and the Chief Medical Officer to transfer all para medical staff serving at one place for more than five years. In Special Appeal No. 320 of 2004, this direction was treated to be a recommendation and in pursuance thereof the State Government has issued the transfer policy providing transfer of all para medical staff serving for more than seven years at a hospital.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the staff nurses have formed a separate cadre and as such a nurse is not a para medical staff. In order to appreciate whether the nurses are para medic staff, the learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the meaning of word 'Paramedic' as defined in 'New Oxford Intermediate Learner's Dictionary (2000), which quoted as below:-

"Paramedic, paero'medic/noun(c) a person has had special training in treating people who are hurt or ill, but who is not a doctor or nurses."

The petitioners have further relied upon the meaning of 'para-medic' as defined in 'Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary (2000) which is quoted as below:-

"para-medic/paera'medik/nown, a person whose job is to help people who are sick or injured, but who is not a doctor or a nurse; Paramedics treated


the injured at the roadside before taking them to the hospital--compare AMBULANCE MAN---para-medical/okl/adj: paramedicalskills/ staff."

I find that the petitioners are raising hyper technical please. While referring to the paramedical staff, the Court in its order dated 18.1.2004 and 16.9.2004 was referring to all such staff who assist the Doctor. The job of a paramedic is to assist the medical professional in taking care of the patient. They cannot be excluded from the definition of paramedic for the purposes of transfer. The Court has already taken a view which has been accepted by the State Government, that the transfer of all paramedical staff, serving for more than five years at a place, be made in the larger interest of the public.

It Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, the word 'Para medic' is defined as under:-

"Paramedic- one who assists a physician (as by giving injection and taking X-rays).

Para medical - concerned with supplementing the work of highly trained medical professionals or aids and technicians"

In the present case, all the petitioners are serving as Staff Nurses and Sisters, as para medical staff in the Government hospitals at Varanasi for more than seven years. There is no denial of the period of service in the writ petition. All the petitioners have been transferred within the same district from one hospital to another. The orders of transfer as such are not likely cause any hardship to the petitioners. On the contrary it would serve the larger interest of the public. A transfer is an exigency of service  and is not be lightly interfered by the Court.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

Let a copy of this order be given to the learned Chief Standing counsel for immediate compliance of the order, free of costs.

Dt. 24.1.2005



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.