(/ slNGLE BEN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH C r WRIT PETITION N0343‘2l0F 2006 / Rajendra Kumar Agrawal, S/o Late Shxi S.L. Agrawal, Aged about 48 years, Presently posted and working as Sub Divisional Officer, Water Resources Construction Sub Division, Pendxa Road, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Water Resources, D.K.S. Building, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ' Deputy Secretary, Department of Water Resources, D.K.S. Building, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Engineer-in-Chief, Department of Water Resources, Sihava Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Executive ‘ Engineer, Water Resources Division, Pendraroad, Distt Bilaspur / 5. D. Jaiswal, Assistant Engineer, Mini Mata Bango Canal, Division No.6, Sakti, District Janjgir—Champa, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDigI ARTICLE 22(6l/I27 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA I. FAR’I‘IC ULARS OF THE II’ETJI'MONER. SH PETITIONER: “ XI—HC—78 sawmm,mi1w W . ‘wpma.;gi%£\.o?c£ £6200 WW (W) a—wI%\:I\$r&af$ wmm WW§f€®W mmwanév §3WW . / 13-?-290$ Shri 8D. Guru, counsel for the petitioner. Shri $atish Gupta, respondents No.1 f0 r4, on advame Heard both the couneet. By the instant petition, the petitioner has chaiienged the order dated 4.7.2006 whereby respondent No.2 has transferred the petitioner from Pendra Road to Hasdeo Barriiage Water Management, sub Division Dani, Korba and in piece of the pettioner respondent No.5 namely Mr. D. Jaiswai has been posted. Learned oouneei for the peitioner submitted that he is preeeing o'nty one point i.e. respondent No.5 is not eiigibie to be posted as SDO for the reason that he has not passed jepartmentai examination in Accounts which is necessary quaiitioation to be posted as SDO. Moreover, respondent No.5 is working at a place from where he has been transferred since East 4 months on Therefore, the petitioner has been transferred just to accommodate respondent No.5. Counsel further submitted that in the circumstan , the petitioner may be allowed to make a representation to respon rNo.2 raising alt his grievances and in turn, he be directed to decide r esentation to which learned counsei for respondents has no objection. Having heard learned couns l for the parties, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the ca e, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the petiti ner ts allowed to make a detaited representation along with copy oft is petition to respondent No.2 within a period of 10 days from today and turn, respondent No.2 is directed to decide representation of the petitio er within a period of 3O days from the Liepu‘y Govt. Advocate for the State! copy. l P.T.O. - l c s d t e r i XI—HC~78 Q 9 3a W,>®?i1w,W mm .0.00.0.0. q ..o.o.oo.o m 200 WW (W) 'mWW WWEWW WWW - WWW raw - éSWW date m“ receipt of representation, ir an ob§ective manner, after coneidering a” the points raised by the petitioner, in accordance with law‘ With the direction aforesaid‘ the petition stands disposed of. Consequently, M.(\N)P. No 2527/2006 and LA. No.6735/2006 also stand disposed of. Parties are entitied for certified copy of this order. Sd/— LC. Bhadoo Judge ,%_ Ban/e