§iiiu ~&- wxAmaa: .‘ J? )?©¢_ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P. (S) No. ?Z7/g /2oo9 PETITIONER ../ Anita Agrawal, W/o Shri P.K. Agrawal, aged about 41 years, Occupation—District Programme Officer, Woman 85 Child Development Department, Mahasamund Distt. Mahasamund (C.G’.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS /1) State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Woman 8L Child and Social Welfare Department, D.K.S Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) K 2) Commissioner, Directorate Womqn and Child Development, Raipur (C.G.) /3) Collector Mahasamund Distt. ‘ Mahasamund (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA x idd ' HEGH CGURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUE WRIT PETmON (S) No. 7228 of 2099 XYRH" PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUHQN OF INDIA W SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. A nihotri J. Present: Smt. Hamida Siddique: Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Paukaj Shn'vastava: Panel Lawyer for $116 State/raspondents. ORDER ORAL (Pasged on 11 day of December, 2009) With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finaliy. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 29th June, 2009 (Amexure P/l), the petitioner, working as District Programme Officer, Women & Chiid Deveiopment Department, Mahasamund has been transferred to District Janjgir-Champa on administrative gounds. However, the petitioner has not yet been relieved to join the new place of posting. Srnt. Siddique submits that once the order of transfer has been passed, it is for the government to ensure that it is complied with immediately. She relies on a‘ decision of the Supreme Court in Sreedam Chandra Gkosh v. State ofAssam & orkersl, in support of her for enforcement thereof. Shri V Panka Shrivastava learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the Statez’respondents, submits that if the transfer order dated 29m June, 2009 is stiii in existence and has not been complied with, appropriate steps would If the aforesaid transfer order is still in existence, the government is under ‘ an obligation to comply with the same at once. It is accordingly directed that the transfer order shall be complied with forthwith Within a period of two weeks. , 4. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. . Sd/' z Satish K. Agnihotri} Judge contention that if the order is not complied with, a direction can be issued he taken to comply with the order. Amit M -‘ (1995} to soc 567 PETITIONER : Anita. AgrawaL VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of