Mysore/Mysuru: In a swift development after the State Government passed the transfer order last night, Rohini Sindhuri met Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa this morning in Bengaluru. She urged the CM not to transfer her as she was in the midst of COVID work in Mysuru and was aiming at making Mysuru a COVID-free district by July 1.
Sources from Bengaluru said that Rohini Sindhuri called on Yediyurappa at his official residence Cauvery and requested the CM to reconsider the transfer decision. She explained to the CM about her work in Mysuru and refuted allegations made against her.
Giving a patient hearing to Rohini Sindhuri, the CM told her that it is not possible to revoke the transfer and asked the IAS officer to take charge of her new responsibilities. The CM too confirmed this to reporters and said, “In the light of transfers, Rohini Sindhuri had come to meet me. There is no question of re-examining the transfers. I have asked her to report to the Department to which she has been transferred to.”
Reports said that Rohini Sindhuri came in a private car to Bengaluru.
How ,her predecessor would have felt when he was transferred only one month after his assuming charge and
This lady succeeded him. I think she is highly influential. Even she meets the CM and asking him not to transfer
her. But the theory of “KARMA “ has worked.!!!
Rohini is innocent. She must go to High Court and file a case and win back her position.
This is the price of being honest and upright officer.
I feel that she is smart and courageous; knows how to get the work done correctly. Sooner or later, Karma will get attached to the local politicians who engineered her transfer. She will remain the best IAS officer, no doubt!
Britisher’s adopted ” Divide and rule “. Karnataka Govt. adopts ” Aya Ram Gaya Ram “. What developments can one expect from this rule? Time people protested for such rule. IAS officers must serve minimum of 3 years in their posting and should not be transferred to the whims of politicians, unless there is a serious corruption charges proved against them. Why High court is silent on this issue?