/7 ^ THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF 1%^'^ CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR" ^?* ^>?'./ ^^•** ..*•' c^^/' ••' ^?''^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE W.P.N05SBOQF2003 / ffi CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^*^ /•' ^y PETITIONER ^ti- '^ !.^ '""" Satya Deo Mishra, aged about 48 years, S/o Shri J.B.Mishra, Forest Range Officer, R/o. Kosabadi, Korba, Tahsil and District Korba (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENT State ofChhattisgarh through Secretary Forest Department Government of Chhattisgarh DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WMT / WRITS, ORDER / ORDERS DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS ETC. XI-HC-22 3^ST^T fN^^n^T ^FWF^cf 3^ ^I^M^, ^Tf)^41(o, [^^Kiy 3-TT^TMsicft ^TO^TgPTW'^^^'^^^^^/^I 2003> \s-r ^n^T^cTT^K^T 12-4-2005 Mr. K.A. Ansari, Senior the peijtioner. Mr. Sanjay Shyam Agraw^I The petitioner, who is Department, State of Articie 226 of the Constiiution o( of the order dated 8-4-2003 transferred from Korba to (Annexure P-14) whereby the pursuance of the Court's dated 10-10-2003 (Annexure P-f Korba. The petitioner mainly has| that he has been transferred aiso on the ground that during jn Jagdalpur area, from there] Naxatjte affected area i.e. distance of 48 kms. from Konta.l Officer at Wjld Buffaio Sanctuar^ took stem action against the feeiings of revenge in the petittoner discharged his duties became the terget of ttie and apprehending danger to his dated 25-10-1990 to the thenl Madhya Pradesh wherein he ^dvocate with Mr. M.K. Sinha. Advocate for I, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent. w^rking as Forest Range Offioer jn the Forest Chhattisslarh, has preferred this writ petjtion under India, questioning the iegality and propriety (Anhexure P-6) whereby the petitioner has been Narjayanpur, aiso ihe order dated 8-10-2003 representation made by the petttioner in direc|yon has been rejected and also the order 16) whereby the petitioner was relieved from mirld Naxatitles chl^td41T1 ^I^^T^te^if^^K ^)3:rf^T3:n^?T frcjm the I chaKenged his transfer order on the ground Korba within a period of six months and period 1988-90the petitioner was posied on 21-9-1990 he was transferred to the Kri^taram under South Bastar Divisjon at a During the probatjonary period as a Range |r, the petitioner worked with entiiusjasm and pc|achers and encroachers. which resulted in of Naxaiiites, active in the area. The l^ith all sjncerity and devotion, therefore, he Looking to the hostiljty of the Nsxalites |life, the petitioner submitted a repr^entaiion Forest Minjster of the erstwhile State of de^crib^d ail the clrcumstances and risk of iife XI-HC-22 3Tr^T^)T f^t^3^r ^FW^^cT ^IN^I ^w^ ~s^ ^ww^, Q-^\w\<o, fG)diyy< 3TT^T<?^? ^••^•^.•"^-^ 2003 ^ f^g ^TT^r^cTTW^T '2-f the invoived in case the order of looking to that the said transfer the State of Madhya Pradesh transferred to Rajnandgaon, ther^ Return has been filed or( 26 ofthe return it has been paragraphs 5.9, 5.10, 5.11, 5.{ respectfully submitted that if oni representation the contente statements of facts. The petitio^ to get himsejf transferred out worked in any Naxalite 1nfested| to worR jn those areas. Sf all these areas the benefrt of the reached to the gross rootleveis. i havo heard ieamed Perusal of para 2 of the| year 1990 to the then Forest) Pradesh reveals that at th^t representation that when he Range there was encroachmeitt being removed, the NaxaJites also invoived in Jilegal killing 4j them from doing these activitie4 mentioned that even on 8-8-11 Geedam on motorcycte at abo|u made on him by axe to kill hir(i, courtseJ CM^F<<t41Ti ^i^^iT^fte^it^^K ^3:rf^T3TT^T fewsting at Kristaram is not cancelled, and jwas cancelled by the then Forest Minister of |vide Annexure P-2 and the petitioner was he worked up to 1 994. behalf of the State/respondent and in para ijnentioned that the allegations contained in 12 & 5.13 of the petition are denled. It Is because the petitioner has submittect some ti|iereof may not be regarded to be true |er might have submStted these facts in order ofjthe Jagdalpur Cjrcle. The petitioner has not larea srnce November, 1990. Some one has emptoyees and ofHcers refuse to work jn kelfare schemes of the Government cannot irjiseJ for the partios and perused the record. |representation made by the petitioner jn the Minister of the erstwhile Stete of Madhya time, the petitioner mentioned in the |yas posted as Supervisor in the Matwada in that area and the encroachments were <|ised to put on fire Ine forest and they were the animals and when he was preventing his name was put in the hit list. !t is further R90 when he was going from Jagdalpur to it 4 O' clock in the nlght some attack was i, but he was saved on account of the high XI-HC-22 3TI^T^T ^i<=h3TT^T ^W^^fgcT 3^ ^WW^y ^Tf1^ll<S, f^dl^y 311^1 ^5iCfl ^8Nf<11 A^Jc^ -»^^• - —^4 4 -»"/^T 200-3 v^ 3TI^T^<fTW:^f?cT cMt speed of the motorcyeje. Consi^ transferred from Kristaram area 1|o in this petition aiso the petitioner Vide order dated 24-11-2P ie respondent WQ^ directed to petitjoner. Snspite of a clear anything about the veracity of respondent in its reply simply m< petitioner cannot be taken as a| submitted these facte in order ojrcie. InspJte of the order mad|e about the veracity of the asserti^ forward with a ciear cut reply a( not. It is not said that it was no< veracjfy of ttie assertions made| the potitioner by way of the hit list of the Naxatites, Minister of the Stete of Madhys^ assertion has been made by th4 the petitioner cannot be taken of the State/respondent. Simpte| of tiie petitioner. The Siate was| was in the hit list of the Naxalite^ on his life or not, In view of the above factfe, Naxaiites, the ground raised bf taken lightly. Therefore, lam ^ repres©titation <=bi^f<n^Ti ^i^QiT^:teT:^'<f^^<i< ^3Tf^T3TT^T jjering that representation, the petitioner was 1|o Rajnandgaon videorder dated 1-11-1990. }ias raised the same point. -2p03and again vide order dated 14-6-2004, sjscertein about these assertions made by the stand of the petitioner wlttiout mentioning |he assertions made by the petitioner, the mtioned that the representatjon made by the true stetement of facts and he might have |o get hjmself transferred out of Jagdalpur by the Court that respondent to ascertain >ns rnade by the petitioner, jt has not come to whether these assertions are correct or possible for the respondent to ascertain tfie |by the petitioner. On the request made by to the erstwhile Minister ttiat he is in c4nsidering that representation the erefcwhile Pradesh transferred him and again same petitjoner, therefore, the assertion made by iiihtiy as there is no specific repiy on the part Idenlal is not sufficient to reject the assertion required to repiy tfiat whether the petitioner or not and whether any attempt was made ?, when the petitioner is in the hit tist of the the petitioner is correct and it cannot be 4f the opinion that the impugned orders are XI-HC-22 3^T'<1NI<?1<4, ^Tft^l^, fcjdl^l^ ^r1-?^^ ^-.^.^^.S^J *?nTOTSWW""""-"<^'^-^ 200-S. ^ ^T^T^T f^lN'3TT^T Sb^Jch^Tf?cT Soma ^' 371^T5^TTS[K^f?cT -^ liabte to be quashed only on this passed without considering this a; Accordingly, the impugnod orders However, as the petitioner is wori about to complete three years tent at Jiberty to pass order regarding exigency so requires. Stay order dated 24-11-200 on stands vacated. With the above observati disposedof. Consequently, I.A.Nos.132/1 stend disposed of. Parties are cbl^tld41^ ^l^dT^-T^ (^W( ^. '^rf^TT3T?^T score being arbitrary as the same were tpect of the point raised by the petitioner. ^nnexures P-6, P-14 & P-16 are quashed. |ing at Korba since May, 2002, and he js re there, therefore, now the respondent is Ipostjng of ttie petitioner. jf administratiye granted by this Court and continuecS later >ns and directions, ttie petition stends 2004, 498/2004, 56/2005 & 57/2005 also entjtled for certifi^d copy ofthis order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge