.x,l,f t< ^ ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.1 WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 1^2^ /2010 PETITIONER . \^ )./ \^ r>.^-r<?F:^ .^/y '^•^:^'- ^•^\^:y' '^^"" f^y" ^^" RESPONDENTS Suresh Kumar Bairagi S/o Raindayal Ram Bairagi, aged-about 45 years, Pricipal Govemment Girls Higher secondary school, Sai^igarh, R/o ?^< teachers colony, Khelbhatha, Samgarh, Distt.- Raigarh [C.G.] VERSUS l.State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary School education department, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur [C.G.] 2. Director, Lok Shikshan Sanchanalaya, Raipur [C.G.] 3. District Education officer, Raigarh, Distt.- Raigarh [C.G.] 4. Principal, Government Girls Higher secondary school, Samgarh, Distt-Raigarh[C.G.] WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT. ORDER OR DIRECTIONS ^ .^ ».°' .^"..'•• ST) PETITIONER RESPONDENTS J^^HC_QURTOFCHHA"rT(SGARH_:_B}L^^ WRST PET1TSON (8) N0.1882 OF 2010 Suresh Kumar Bairagi Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 ofthe Constitufon of indla) Sjngle Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satjsh K. Agnihotrj, J. Present:- Shri Sanjay Patei, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ajit Slngh, PaneS Lawyer for the State. Shri S.N. Nande, Advocate for the intervener. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 1st day of March. 2011) 1. Heard tearned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeksto ahallenge the legatjty and vatidrty of the ordw dated 16/04/2010 (Annexure P/3) by which the petitioner has bee'n transferred'from Government Girls HJgh School, Sarangarh bistrict-Raigarh to Government High Schooi, Uchcha BhJtthi Block-Sarangarh, District-Raigarh. 3. Learned counset appearing for the State submits that the petifioner has aiready continued at the original piace of postiog for more than 10 months on account of interim order dated 23/04/2010 granted by this Court. The State/respondents may be granted liberty to pass approprjate orders keeping in view public interest and adminlstrative exigency. Learned counsei further submits that the Stote/respondents shall not insist upon compliance of the jmpugned order dated 16/04/2010 (Annexure P/3). it is accordingtyordered. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the intervener submlts ftiat intervener has no objection, If so advised order shall be passed onty in accordance with law. 5« Since no effect could be given to the impugned order dated 16/04/2010 (Annexure P/3) on account of the interim order dated 23/04/2010, it is not necessary to 90 into the legallty and validity of the impugned oreler dated 16/04/2010 (Annexure P/3)> in the facts ofthe case. 8. In view of the above, according to learned counset appearing for the petJtioner, nothing survives in this petitlon for adjudication at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. No order asto coste* (^ Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotn Judge