w •.-^^•sy^ "•? IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUREAT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P.(S)No. 611^—/ 2006 ^ PETITIONER ,^-IRFAN-UL-RAHIM KHAN. S/o.'ShriA.R. Khan, rk" (^"v? ^••t?" ....-• .--•••''""fe.^'^' ...••••""" Aged about- 42 years, y<es81""' .^•"" Presently working as '^•-" Inspector, Road Transport Department R/o. Kududand, Bilaspur (C.G.) •i'V &" nb ^:>y^A\-0 ^"^' \0 '' VERSUS m RESPONDENTS i* ^^K?^ "\"^ ii°( " ,&y^id^ \^-s>^^y 'VSfK''is^-'°'s;f^y -1. State of Chhattisgarh- Through the Secretary, Home Department , D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director General of Police, ^ Police Hd. Qtrs. Raipur (C.G.) 3. Commissioner of Transport of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) ^K Additional Transport Commissioner, Bus Stand, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA FORISSUANCEOF APPROPRIATE WRIT, WRITS^ORDER^IRECTIQNS ETC. XI-HC-22 •OTi'S^iT f?:iw3n^r Sh*l flf?(T 'L. .).; Gowri y.^ 3^''<<1<<|W<1, STfl'H'KS, RlClltf'y. 3T^T9?^v -- ; *<i*ini sn*<i«n" "'' ••""• • • • • •••"fl^ f200 ^^...,....... sn^f ?RITW ;HIN' 13-11-2006 Shri Manish Sharma and S|l Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Govt. Heard. Vide order dated 25-1-20p5 were handed over on deputatior( order the tenure of deputation dated 9-11-2006 (Annexure-P/1{ 4-11-20W to his parent departmetlt Learned counsel appearir|g per the guidelines of the State deputation for two years and in jm that the petitioner's services completion of two years whereas] end on 24-1-2007; therefore, the| be given effect. The gist of the order completion of frivo years in the did not challenge the order on a legal right, repatriatjon of be interfered with. In view Qftheabove, thewl' to be dismissed in limine and is Consequently, M.(W.).P.T stand disposed of. servides <tii<<fci41-i *ii*iciTfttei^<Ri«i< ^isrf^ITSIT^r ^hri Ali Asgar, counsel for the petitioner. 4dvocate for the State/respondents. -20p5 (Annexure-P/4) petitioner's services to Transport Department. In the said |s not specified. Vide impugned order his services were repatriated from for the petitioner contended that as G4)vernment services are handed over on Impugnedorder it has been mentioned ^re repatriated from 4-11-2006 after |the period of two years will come to an pmpugned order on the face of it cannot is repatriation; therefore, mentioning orderwas not necessary. Petitioner Sde, therefore, deputation being not until it stood to be mala ffde cannot stid mb/a Itlo. 'l'it petition filed by the petitioner is tiable aitcordingly dismissed. 5.4578/06 & I.A.No.10717/0?^ also Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge (<f^y^) ^'