10-^^ IN THE^HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHAmSGARHV WRIT PETITIONfSl N0.'3'?3^/2010. PETITIONER: Vijaynath Tiwari, son of Late Manu Tiwari, aged about 46 years, working as Forest Cruard, Range Duldula, Tahsil Duldula, District Jashpur, Chhatrisgarh. i-'isi.i'taii Respondents <»? versus / 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Forest Departm.ent, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. '' 2. Divisional Forest Officer, Jashpur Forest Division, Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Collector, Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. /. i°l..-'n -.';A..''' ^^.y ^••<^' ^.^0'"^ ^^^°v r'~'<" ^^ ^ ^ ^ WRTT PETmON UNDER AKTICLE226 OFTHE CONSTITUTION QF INDLA. •"%),. -..^':<. -::iiy^ IGH COURT OF^HHATTISGArai AT BH-ASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 373S OF 2010 Petitioner Vijaynath Tiwari Versus Respondents State of Chhattsgarh & Others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF iNDIA (SB: Hon'bte Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present:- Shri C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate for the petitioner. ShriAJit Singh, Panel Lawyer for ttieState/respondents. 3 s ORDERtORAU (Passed on 15th day ofMarch, 2011) Learned counsel appearing Tor the petitloner submits that vlde oKler dated 15.07.2010 (Annexure P/1), the petitiwer, working as Forest Guard In the Forest Department at Duldula Range was fransferrej to Sanna Range, Maina Parisar, on administrativegrounds. However, by virtue of order dated 23.07.2010, the orderdated 15.7.2010, which is impugned herejn couid not be given effect to, wheretn this Court directed to maintain status quo. Shri Rao, further submits that the petitioner is continuing at the original place of posting. Since more than seven months have passed and in view ofthe order dated 23.07.2010, the petitioner is continuing at the original place of posting, it is not necessary to go into the merits of the case at this :3snoK Learned counsel appearing for the State/resppndents sutm'iits thatthe Government may be granted liberty to pass a fresh order without insisting on compliance of order dated 15.07.2010, in r^pect ofthe petitigner. In view of the above submission, according to learned counsel Tor the petitioner, nothing surviyesforadjudicatipn atthis stage. Accordingty, the writ petition is disposed of with the afore^ated observationand liberty, tfsoadvised. ^ ^,^ ^: y^vy