£>. INTHEHONBLEHI(SH.COUl^S©F^U©B@iM)RBMWi ^ffiu^pUR'^':1-'<:'• r:;::::.'';':!'r' WRTT PETmON f &1 NO.4/ Lf OF 2002 fPETmONUNDERARneLE2260FTHEGONSTmiTION@lg INDIA^ ^y^^3^ PETmQNER ...^ '^^••\\ \'y ^t-iy A' ri'2'" ^•-•" Gaurishankar Soni Agecfc. about 50 years S/a Dashrath Prasad Soni, "OfRcer Scale —III", presently working as a Branch Manager, Durg- Rajnandgaon Gramin Bank Deori BranGh Tahsil Dondilohara Distt- Durg :(CG);;.;.'':1:-. i--.^ VERSUS RESPONDENT: ^" jDurg RarjnaEiclgaon ©raniin Bank through it^'Chairman, Durg RajnandgaOn Gramin Bank, Head Office G.E. Road, near Mundrakun]^n<n^«w Distt- Rajnandgaon. Cc •(f) WMT PETTTION UNDER ARTIGL& 226 ©^^^^^^^^T^ C©NS11B-IIUTIONafflg^N©I^UllBilli^llllEN®E® Wi^i|RiiSMai|i8iiiai ^iBBiaaBi il^ ffWE^vism^^sB^i@j^^^i^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^- ^' -HC—7S 'airisi-^^N; "^ff sn^r sp'qNi' Jf' T *II*ICTI tfi^ltb 'S^-^wKiq,wfll-ti're, ^Kiiwy, a^N?-^-a-£i>--tltl)---^200% Sf^ ira^T (ipf^q^tt) TOIW^tel sil^l SB: Hon, Mr. Justice Prlt 07.57.2009; Shri Vishnu Koshta, cii Shri P.S.Koshy, coun^ Challenge in the presjent 18.12.2007 (Annexure P/9J which the petitioner, an of|i from Branch Deorito Brancll Contention of the cou petitioner is holding the Offi' order impugned he has beei Counse! for the petitioner hc showing that categorization pursuant to the National therefore as per the condil ought notto have been post^d On the other hand, co that Annexure P/6 on which is mereiy a guideline and ths underthelaw. He further si tilfid'JI-l ^l^cii iTfe^ TiW5^ ^sifinaii^i nkerDiwaker lunsei for the peti^ioner. el for the respondent. petition is to the order dated passed by the respondent by jcer of Scale lli was transferred Mahud Machandur. nsel for the petitioner is that the perScaie III post whereas by the i transferred to a Scale i branch. [s filed a document Annexure P/6 of the branches has been done Industrial Tribunal Award and |ion of the award, the petitioner at Scate 1 branch. unsel for the respondent submits the petitioner is placing reliance, said guideline is not enforceable Ibmits that in the administrative -^y- •^s^ "i?ia: 1 K Wl fe-li* HI*<CTI SS<1(^ '73! ^wiv\^, &ri\w\e, [»»wy ^M.n^^.US....... sii^l •q^F (1pf3^f) TOiRK^fe<m^i exigency the petitioner ha^ transferthe service conditiolis be affected adverseiy. At this stage, counse) may be permitted to withdr^w representation to the resporldent to the respondent for decid|ng this submission of the petit| has no objection. petit|on Accordingiy, the liberty as aforesaid. If the p^titioner the respondent within a pe^ receipt of the copy of this decide the same within a fuilther date of its receipt. It is made clear that opinion on merit of the c^se wouid be free to decid4 accordance-with Saw. +wifi4-i imigf ^ ft%t •i^H ^i'aifiCTsii^f been transferred and by such offhe petiSioner are not going to for the petitioner submits that he w this petition with liberty to file a t. He further seeks a direction the same sympathetically. To 'oner, counsei for the respondent is dismissed as withdrawn with makes a representation to 1-iod of 15 days from the date of cjrder, the respondent in turn shall period of one month from the his Court has not expressed any and the authority concerned the representation strictly in Sd/- . : . ,• :. Pntinker Diwakar "~v,;,; .Judge:,;—-!.: anrfte A*T ga'iRBFtra-rr?ri?—FS/95—i) /2008—i,00,000. w r