02/09 2026 AD/10/18 266312 NANDY (DO) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA/23969/2026 MOU DAS VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. Mr. Saptarshi Roy, Advocate Ms. Kakali Das Chakraborty, Advocate ……for the Petitioner Mr. D.N. Roy, learned Government Pleader Mr. Guddu Singh, Advocate ……for the State 1. Affidavit of service, as filed, be kept with the record. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved with the routine transfer directing her to join the Department of Pathology in the Raiganj Government Medical College and Hospital. 3. The petitioner is engaged in the West Bengal Medical Education Service (WBMES) and was working as an Associate Professor in the Department of Pathology, IPGME&R, Kolkata. The petitioner's husband is also a similarly appointed Professor whose service has been transferred to the district of Bankura. The petitioner has been in service since 2010. 4. The petitioner is not challenging the order of transfer nor is she averse to being transferred as such. The only difficulty which the petitioner faces is that she has two children. The elder child, a son, is inflicted with Autism Spectrum Disorder. The petitioner's other child, a daughter, is presently preparing to take the Class 10 Board examinations. P a g e | 2 5. The transfer of the petitioner's husband to Bankura and her transfer to Raiganj will leave the child with disability without a caregiver and will also result in displacement of the child from his known surroundings, which, according to the special school which he attends, could cause a severe regression in his behavior, which has to be avoided under all costs. 6. The endeavor to show that the petitioner should be considered more sympathetically in so far as the transfer is concerned, emanates from several office memorandums and notifications, all of which are issued by the Government of India. In such office memorandums, Autism has been included as a benchmark disability. 7. The memorandum of the Government of West Bengal of 08.03.2022 also takes into account the disability of a child as a ground for posting and transfer of a teacher who is the caregiver to a place of his/her choice. 8. The petitioner's transfer order of 19.08.2026 prompted a series of representations to be made by the petitioner on 21.08.2026, 22.08.2026 and 25.08.2026. The authorities have acted with some apathy and without applying themselves to such representations of 21.08.2026 & 22.08.2026, proceeded to issue the release order of the petitioner on 24.08.2026. 9. The order of transfer and the order of release P a g e | 3 have been done in a rather mechanical manner without considering the petitioner's precarious situation as the sole caregiver to a child with benchmark disability such as Autism Spectrum Disorder. 10. It is imperative that her representations of August 21, 22 and 25, 2026 are considered in the light of the memorandums of 06.06.2014, 17.11.2014 and 08.10.2018 issued by the Central Government. These should be read alongside the State's own memorandum of 08.03.2022. 11. Since these representations have not been considered, I direct Respondent No. 3 to consider such representations within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order. 12. Respondent No. 3 will also consider, if the petitioner is required to be transferred, to transfer the petitioner to a place of her choice, preferably within a traveling distance of not more than two hours from her present place of residence. 13. In view of the afore-stated, the release order dated 24.08.2026 is set aside. 14. The order of transfer dated 19.08.2026 will be kept in abeyance and will be suitably modified in so far as the petitioner is concerned by the order to be passed by Respondent No. 3. 15. The resultant order of the consideration of the representations of the petitioner will be P a g e | 4 communicated to the petitioner within a period of seven days from the date of passing of the order. 16. If the service book and other material records pertaining to the petitioner's service have been transferred to Raiganj Medical Hospital, Respondent No. 3 shall take steps to return the same either to the petitioner's present place of posting or to the newly transferred post, which will be decided upon consideration of the representations. 17. With the afore-stated directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 18. Urgent Photostat Certified Copy of this order, be given to the parties, if applied for, on priority basis. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)