a x HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Writ Peiitian (S) No. 1331 of 2%9 Vinod Kumar Kesharwani, son of Shri Janakram Kesharwani, aged 55 years, occupation — Research Officer, Service, presently ' posted ' as Project dmfnistraton integraiw T¥§ba§ A Deveiopment Pmject, Narayanpur (Shhattisgarh). Versus h‘ “\\ State of Chhattisg'afh through the Se¢retary, Department of Scheduied Castes ‘3‘ Scheduied Tribe's Deveiopment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur. The Cbmmissio’ner, Departmem o Scheduled Castes & ScheduledTribes Deveiopment, Raipur. Respondents The Election Commission of India, thmugh' the Chief Electien Oificey, Nirvachan Sedan, Ashoka Road, New Dei'ni' 110061. Shri RS. Ramieke, son of no: knewn io the petitioner, occupatien — Ass§stant Research Ofhcer, presehtly posied as Assistant Project Administmtor, Abujhamad Deveiepmeht Thbunai, Nzarayanpur (CGO. {Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of indie) 75B: Hon’bie Mr. $atish K. Agnihotri,‘é. Present: Mr. indrasen Sahu, Adxiocate forthe petitioner! Mr. Pankaj Shri‘vastaVa, Panei Lawyer for the State. / omit bRoER (Passed on this 29th day of March $3139} Learned oounsei appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, Sub Divisional Officer, working as incharge, Project Administrator, integrated Tribai Deveiopment project, Narayanpur has been transferred to the otnce of’ Commissioner, Department of Scheduied'Castes & Scneduieci Tribes r Deveiopment, Raipur, by order dated 20-2-2099 {Annexure PM), on the ground that the petitioner has completed three years ’of service, thus, the transfer of ‘ Petitianer f the petitioner was a'equired in accordance wi‘xh iet‘ter dated 4-2-2009 of ihe E!ection Commission of India (Annexure PIS). Learned counsek further submits that the petitioner was appointed on the present place of posting on 3-1 120%. The petitioner has not compieted three years of service on or before 3i-5-2009 as required under letter dated 4-2-20G9 of the} Election Commission of incite. Thus, the impugned transfer order is not in accordance with the instructions issued under the said ietter by the Eieotion Commission of indie. 2) ivir. Pankaj Shrivastava, iearned Pane! Lawyer appearing for the espondentsJState, does not controvert the facts stated by the counsei for the petitioner. 3) it appears that since the petitioner has not oompieted three years of service on or before 31—5-2009, he does not come within the purview of the ietter dated 4-2-2009 (Annexure PIS) issued by the Eiection Commission of india. 4) 1n View of the reasons mentioned hereinabove, as the impugned transfer otder is not passed in administrative exigenoy or in pubiic interest, the impugned transfer order dated 20-2-2009 (Annexure P/t) in respect of the petitioner deserves to be and is quashed. Accordingiy, the petition is aiiowed. 5) Consequentiy, i.A.No.1 for grant of ad-interim reiief aiso stands disposed ’4. i Sd/- ‘ Satish K. Agnihotri -' Judge of. Hiv t