IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETmON (S) No. * R\6CZ/ OF 2011 SERVICE MATTER WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI MANDAMUS, PROHIBITION AND/OR A SUITABLE DIRECTION OR ORDER To DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER PETITIONERS / 1. N. D. Suryavanshi S/O Late Shri K.R. Suryavanshi Aged about 45 years, Resident of Devi 66o TahSiI Nagar, Maharana and District Pratap Chowk, — Bilaspur, Biiaspur ‘ ’Y (Chhattisgarh) (Wrongly mentioned In order impugned as A.D. Suryavanshi) 2. T. R. Anchai, V S/o Late Shri B.R. Anchai, ‘ ®§ a? Aged Kumharpara, about Jarhabhata, 44 years, Bilaspur, Resident Tahsii of and District — BilaspuriChhattisgarh) VERSUS 1. / State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Deveiopment Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantraiay, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) /2. The Secretary, Water Resource Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantraiay, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3. Chief Engineer, Water Resource Department, Shihava Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) I 4. The Janpad Panchayat, Through : Chief Executive Ofticer, Masturi, Biiaspur, I District — Biiaspur (Chhattisgarh) I RESPONDENTS DETAILS OF THE PETITION PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONERS As mentioned above in the cause title. 2. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENT ‘ As stated in the above cause titie. , S HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR AWRIT PETYHON (S) N0. 21 62 OFQDH PETITIONERS N‘D.Suryavanshi & Another Versus RESPONDENTS $tate of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Artic‘e 226 of the Constitution of india) Singie Bench : Hon’bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- Shri Sandeep Dubey. Advocate forthe petitioners Shri Y.S.Thakur, Dy‘ Advocate Genera! forthe State. ‘ ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 26‘“ day of April, 201 1) 1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 03.12.2010 (Annexure P-i), whereby, the petitioners have been repatriated to their parent department i.e.'Water Resource Department. 2. Pursuant to the order dated 09.12.2009 passed in K.P.Choukse v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, the State Government has taken a decision to repatriate all} the employees who were working in the Rural iEngineering Services Department back to the originai parent department ie. Water Resource Department and to that effect the impugned order dated 03.12.2010 (Annexure P-i) was passed. The petitioners submit that pursuant to this order. they shouid aiiow to continue in the Rurai Engineering Services Department tiil the proper posting order is passed. There is no dispute that tiil proper posting order is passed they cannot be posted at any place. 3. On reading of the impugned order dated 03.12.2010, it appears that even the place of posting of all the employees is also being ‘ indicated. The grievance of the petitioners is that proper posting f? $7 order has not'been passed and the order passed is without any basis and deserves to be rejected. Learned counsel appéaring for the respondents State submits that The posting order shaii be immediately issued. On A repatriation, the petitioners have been asked to join office of the Chief Engineer, Water Resource Department of the area concerned. Thereafter, the proper posting order is to be issued. Learned oounsei further submits that though the petitioners have given the joining, but they have not been aiiovved to join, in that case, iearned Dy. AG. submits that it wiii be ensured that the petitioners are permitted tojoin in place of their posting. in View of foregoing, teamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that nothing survives for adjudication in this matter at this stage. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at the motion stage :5 Sd/. ‘ SATISH K. ANGNIHORI i Judge s itself.