@ 3mm 3mm BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (can) W.P.(S) No. §9§f9 0f2011 Kamta Prasad Nishad s/o Baishaku Ram Nishad aged about 56 years, Head Master Primary School Baghmara Block Dhamdha Disrict Durg (C.G) VERSUS ..// RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through — The Secretary Education Department D..K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2.’/'District Education Officer Durg (C.G) WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS/ DIRECTION OF OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT. Amiw r H PETITIONER [f HKEH CSURT OF CHHATT§SGARH : BiLg$§3UR WRIT PET§T§GN (S) N0. 52?7 GF 2&1 PEETECWER Karma Pragad Niahad Versus RESPON$ENTS State 0?” Chhaii§sgarh & Anoiher (mm? Peiiiisn under Article 226 of the CansiEtution 0f lndia) S‘mgie Bench : Han’me S‘mi Saiish K. Agnihotri! J. Pieseni :— Mane for “aha gnaiiies. CRDER {GRAD {Passeé an th§s Q5“ day cf Sepiembai 2m 1} i W‘ i Stric%. 1. Peruseé we record. 2. Cha§!enge in ihis peiman is to ’i%}e order dated i5.6?.2m1 (Annexure x54), passed hy me Disir'm Education Officer, Burg, W‘nefeby the petit‘aonef, working as Headmasier at Primaw Schoai Gheta, Dhamdha, has been tsransferred to Primary Schooi Baghmara, Baiod, an ariministraiwe grounds. 3. m ihe identicai matter Le. Writ Petition (S) Na. 5238 of 2811, wherein $5 impugned crcier was passed by rhe Disirict Eéucaiicn Officer, ihig Cour? has heiG that {he Digtrici Edusatian Offécer is not competem i0 gaass the order, a$ unéer iiae iransfer 90§icy, he couid omy propose for iransfer. The iransfer order muot bé passed oniy by {he Coiiector of the §s in ine case on hone, it aepears §nat i‘ne Disir'ior Edeoafmn Officer, Burg. minnow foirowing we guidelines issued m i‘ne transfer poiicy had passed ihe order imoogned, when rhe Co%§eotor nee been ase'rgneti ihe reeeonsibiiiiy o? ’rransr’er of ihe emp§oyees working in the concerned disirioi, on proposai of the concerned deparimen’is. Thus, this suffers. from ihe oiefeoi of eompetence of the officer. Acoordingiy, the tranefer is unsustainabie in ine eyes of iaw. As a resuii, the iransfer oréer dated i5.0?.2mi (Annexure P4) in reepec‘i of the pe’iiiioner is quashed. However, iiber‘ry is reserved io the government i0 pass an appropriate order, ii so advised, in accordance wi‘ih aominisiraiive exigency and inpuoiio poiioy. in accordance with iew. Aoooro‘ingiy. ihe wrii peiiiion is aiiowed to the above—exieni Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 91 ‘ p) aShQK