c^ THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Sl No3°^2OF 2011 Prabhat Kumar Victor, S/o Shree Victor, aged about 50 years, Presently working as Forest Guard, Forest Basod Depot, Dhamdha, District Durg (CG). Versus RESPONDENTS ^n/0)^.)-"' ^.^^&"^ /l. c^\^V'^* ..•••'. .cy\/\---''' ^•''A^io.V--'' ^'^"^y •c^'' o'^ State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Forest, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG). ^2. Chief Forest Raipur (CG). Conservator, -3. Divisional Forest Officer, Durg Forest Division, Durg (CG). . 4. Forest Conservator, Durg Forest Circle, Durg, District Durg (CG). .5. Abdul Sattar'Khan, S/o Late Abdul Rahim Khan, aged about 54 years, working as Deputy Ranger, Dharadha, Durg Forest Division, Durg, R/o Subhash Nagar, Near Shiva Mandir, Kasridih, Durg (CG). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petitioner, above named, raost hurably and respectfully beg to submits as under: - ")'t^.,,, XI-HC—7S ^ "4i-4i<i<^, ^Ti1y<i<o, f°i<niy'j,< >)o(s;i^o. .S^^g//) •"^200 ?(i:ra^T (^?t3^i) sn^i 'w R-< wn sii^i •aww Ueepii ^. l^IIW ^lftfl 311^1 SB : Mon'ble Snri Manindra Bflohan Shrivastava. J. IS-QT-SQn <^1<lt<-1<i1*T ^tlMflf ^f fel^t <P^<'$R ^sifin aii^i Shri Rajendra Tripathi, counsei jfor the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Govemment Adfocate for the State on advance copy. This petition has been fiied t|y the petitioner aggrieved by order dated 13/7/2011 (Annexure P/1), by which fie petitioner has been posted as officer on speciai duty in Durg range and on his j)iace, respondent No.5 has been posted. Leamed counsei for the petitiorler submits that vide orderdated 21/2/201 1, the peiitioner was posted as Range ^ssistant at Dhamdha, Durg range and then within a short time, the order has b^en changed and in place of the petitioner, respondent No.5, who was eariier w<tking, has beeri brought back and to adjust the employee, the petitioner has been ^hifted. On the other hand, iearned Sta^ecounsel submits that from pemsal of order dated 5/7/2011 passed in the case of|Abdui Sattar Khan v. State of C.G. and others (W.P.(S) No.2104/10), it is cie^r that the impugned order has been passed in compiiance of the order of this Cou(t. He further submits that the petitioner has not subjected to transfer to a disiant j)iace but was transferred in the Durg range itself, though as an ofricer on special d|jty. Taking intoconsideration the si|ibmissions made by learned counsei for the parties and considering ihatthe impugjned order datea 13/7/2011 has been passed in compiiance of order dated 5/7/2011 i do not find a case io interfere with th4 order. The Detition is therefore dismissed. passed by this Court in W.P.t'S) No.2104/10, Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Juc^e 1-~