c^i ^s IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.fSlNO. 3632- / PETITIONER ^^ r^..^^y\f? '•••o^^oy' ,&\. K'o^- '..-' ,f'yy •*'•' .£•" ..•' -<•' RESPONDENTS VERSUS 1. 2. Sint. Pushplata Parichha, W/o Phiiip Parichha, aged about 55 years, Presenfly working as a Project Officer Integrated Child Developinent Project, PaU, Distt. Korba-(C.G-) State of Chhattisgarh Through - the Secretary, Department of Women and Child Developnaent, D.K.S. Bhawaa, Raipur (C.G.) District Programnie Officer, Woaian and Child Developiaent, Korba, Distt. Korba-fC.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS WRTT PETmON,(SLNQ,3692 OF 2010 Smt. Pushplata Parichha Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Another Gowri (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri A.N. Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER_(ORAL) (Passed on this 7th day ofSeptember, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the legality and validity of the order dated 15-7-2010 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Pali, District Korba to Bharatpur, District Korea. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the petitioner has already continued at the original place of posting for more than 13 months on account of interim order dated 22-7-2010 granted by this Court. The State/respondents may be granted liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view public interest and administrative exigency. Learned counsel further submits that the State/respondents shall not insist upon compliance of the impugned order dated 15-7-2010. It is accordingly ordered. 4. Since no effect could be given to the impugned order dated 15-7-2010 on account of the interim order dated 22-7-2010, it is not necessary to go into the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 15-7-2010, in the facts ofthe case. 5. In view of the above, according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication at this stage. 6. ~ Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. No order asto costs. \ SatfebK.^ihow "~ Judge