a - f ' WL/‘WBEE $Egm€3 66 m THE HIGH @tm'r or wmamm m mma g c.G.) 3359951awrs WRIT PEmIT-IQN W} N9: (0912’? / mmhwa Ran sahu aged abut 45. years son ef smi Banuran sarnw presently mstgd as pamari e£ Rama Noiil5§ Revmue Inspectgr Me matgaon Tahsil magarh Diswg %1§Jr ‘QGO). / 1. The State of axhattisgarh Thmu¢a : ihe~sacxetary nepament‘of Revenue. K;<s.~maam Mahtralara -R.a:lp1r‘ (@GIN (2.“; The Under Seiwetarya nepament ef Revenue mK/s‘s. mavan Raimr “w £4 The %11eceor mtmr (we‘migi The a1!» 91v: siénat oi‘Etce‘r’ ‘rahsa'l Bilaigarh District. Wt ‘ we. } n a W C HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Wri'l’ Pe'fi'l'ion gst No. 6027 of 2006 Petitioner Bhikhwa Ram Sahu Versus Respondents lS‘tafe of Chha‘r'risgarh & O'rhers Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Safish K. Agnihofri. Shri Sameer Behar, Advocafe for The pefi’rioner. Smt Anju Ahujn, Depufy Govt Advooa're for fhe Sfafe/respondenfs o R o E a 0*“ November, 2006) The following order of'rhe Court was passed by Sa-l'ish K. Agniho‘rri, J. 1. The pe'l'ifioner was employed as Pa'l'wari and posl'ed of Pa'rwari Halka Number 15 (Bhalgaon), Revenue Circle, Bhafgaon, Tahsil Bilaigarh, Disfricf Raipur. 2. The respondenl' No. 2/5la'fer Government vide order da‘l’ed 30/6/2006 (Annexure P4) lransferred The pefi'rioner from +he Office of 'rhe Collector, Raipur to Patwuri Holka No. 79, Tahsil Aarang, District Raipur. Thereafter, this order was amended and the amended order dated 7/7/2006 (Annexure P/2) was passed, whereby the petitioner was posted at Patwari Halka No. 1, Raipur. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he was not in the office of the Collector therefore, the order of the transfer is bad and deserve to be quashed. /@ 4 Be fhaf as If may fhls is an mTm dls'mc‘r fransfer and Pafwarls are pcsied from one Pafwan Halka 1’0 o'rher Pufwar-I Haiku by way of allooahon of works. The peh‘honer, m The fads of fhe casa, has been posted from one Pafwari Haiku To ofher Pafwari Halko, which would f v nof prejudice his service career. m'ferfere m The fronsfer moffer and 'rhns Cour? can mferfere only fhe case of proved mala flde non-competence of ou’fhorlfy pussmg fhe fronsfer order and transfer order no? bemg m conformn'y wwh fhe rules and regulations. Sd/— Subhosh ! Satish K.Agnihotri ‘ Judge 6. The wri'f pe'H-rion is accordingiy dismissed. No order as +0 cosfs. I