IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR W.P.(S)No.lilfOi /2011 'fy. PETITIONER: ^t fe^ ..••• Vx.b ' ..»,,'<?*XK1"' ..•••'' J^^^ ^'y.o^ ^^^" ^--^ 6*-;e . .•• '^.^ RESPONDENTS: 1) Krishana Kumar Singh Kshatri S/o Late Shri Millap Singh Kshatri Aged about -4& years Occupation- Govemment job on the post of Dresser Grade -I at Community Health Center -Lormi, Tahsil - Lormi, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh The Secretary Health & Family welfare Department D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) The Director Health Department Raipur (C.G.) The Collector District- Bilaspur (C.G.) The ChiefMedical Officer Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) The Block Medical Officer, Community Health Center- Lormi, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER AURTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The above named Petitioner respectfully submits as under :- 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER 2) 3) 4) 5) l0~' Ashok HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETmON(S)No,4401_of2011 PETITIONER : Krishana Kumar Singh. RESPONDENTS VERSU8 State ofChhattisgarfa & Others. WRIT PETl-nON UNDER AR'HCLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'Me Shri Satish K. Agnihotri.A Shri Ravi Maheshwari, Advocate fbrthepetitioner. Shri Arua Sao, Govemment Advoeate fortiie Stata 2. 4. (Passed on 08m day ofAugiist, 2011) Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that vide the impugned order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P/l), the petitioner, working as Dresser, Grade I, at Community Health Ceutre, Lonni, has beea transferred to Primary Health Centre, Sivni, under the Conimunity Health Centre, Marwahi, on administrative grounds. He farther submits that in the impugned transfer order, the name of the petitioner has wrongly been mentioned as 'K.K.'lTiakur' as tfae eorrect name ofthe petitioner is Krishana Kumar Singh Kshatri. Even fhe grade has also nol been mentioned in tfae impugned order. Thus. the same is bad in law. Sao, leamed Govemment Advocate appearing for the State/respondents submits that if it is so, appropriate orders shall be passed keeping in view the above urfmnities in the impugned order. Till then, the impugned order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P/l) inrespect ofthe petitioner shall not be given effectto. In view of the above, according to leamed counsel appearing tbr the petitioner, nothing survives infhis petition for adjudication. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the aforestated observation. ^—-—-— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge