Mi\% IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR [C.G.] WRIT PETITION (SI NO. I I (2,..— /2011 ETITIONER /’” Abhishek Puri Goswami S/o Late Sri Ram Puri Goswami, Aged-about 34 years, working as Shiksha Karmi grade-2, Middle school Butipara, Sarangarh, Distt.— Raigarh [C.G.] VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1.State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur [C.G.] /2. Chief Executive officer, Zila Panchayat, Raigarh [C.G.] WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE ‘6 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTIONS P § HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.1 12 OF 2011 Petitioner Abhishek Puri Goswami Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & Another (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia) * Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- Shri D.R. Patel, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Government Advocate for the State. x A ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 121“ day of January, 201 1) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed Enumerator (Praganak).for conducting the work of Census 2011 under the provisions of sub~section (4) of Section 4 of the Census Act 1948 (37 of 1948). Thereafter, by order dated 23/1 2/2010 the petitioner was transferred from Middle School Butipara, Sarangarh, District-Raigarh to Middle School Parsada Chhote, District-Raigarh. 2. The question asto whether an employee engaged‘ in Census may be transferred before completion of Census work, came up into consideration before this Court in Chandrika Prasad Sinha v. State of Chhattisgarh1 along with other connected matters. This Court having considered all the aspects of the matter held that an employee engaged in the Census may not be disturbed prior to its completion. Accordingly, the writ petition 'filed by several employees was allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner 1 w,P.(S) No.3444 of2010 (decided on 05/10/2010) ‘ _ t @ submits that the issue involvedherein is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in the above-stated cases. Shri Dubey, iearned Government Advocate appearing for the State submits that there is no dispute with regard to the above—stated submission and as such, the writ petition may be disposed of accordingly. Having regard to the fact situation of the case, the impugned order passed in respect of the petitioner is quashed and it is directed that the petitioner may continue at the same piace tilt the work of Census is compiete. Accordingty, the writ petition is disposed of. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Arun