IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION ISI NO. [0%(1/ l 2011 PETITIONER Ashok Kumar Sen, S/o Ramkewal Sen, aged about 29 years; Occupation: Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Belbahera, R/o village—Devadand, Tehsil— Khadgawan, District-Koriya (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Panchayat 8n Social Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) . The Additional Commissioner, Surguja Division, Surguja, Ambikapur (C.G.) The Deputy Director, Panchayat 85 Social Welfare, District-Koriya (C.G.) The Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat Koriya (C.G.) The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Khadgawan, District— Koriya (C.G.) RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE-226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETiTlON (S) N0. 1032 OF 2011 Petitioner Ashok Kumar Sen Versus Respondent State of Chhattisgarh & Others WRIT PET!T!ON UNDER ARTICLE 2’26 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon’ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present :- Shri Ashish Surana Advocate forthe petitioner. Shri Y.S.Thakur, Dy Advocate General for the State ORDER ORAL x {K £4 (Passed on this 23’ day of February, 201 1) i t 1. The petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Additional Commissldner, Surguja Division, Surguja, against the order dated 28.1.2011, whereunder the services of the petitioner as Panchayat Karmi (Panohayat Secretary) was removed. Alongwith the appeal, the petitioner has also preferred an application for interim relief/stay. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that without ‘ considering the case of the petitioner, the appellate authority has rejected the interim application. Thus, the impugned order is bad in law, as the appellate authority was obliged to consider all the submissions made by the petitioner while rejecting the application for “x interim relief. 3. Be that as it may, the principle as averred by the petitioner is correct but the applicability depends on the facts of the case. ln the case on hand, wherein the petitioner has removed from services, which came into effect immediately and thereagainst the appeal was pending, in no case interim relief couid have been granted, as the same would amounts to grant of final relief, as status quo ante. Thus, in the facts of the case, the order impugned herein does not suffer from any perversity, infirmity, illegality warranting interference by this Court. 4. in view of foregoing, the writ petition is dismissed at the motion stage itself. Sd/—' II Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ashok