Bl ^- ^ IN THE HIOH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH AT BJLASFUR Writ Petition No. PETITIONER / 2004 ^ ^•',,•0 .^?&' .<k'c^/ <'^^>'' •<v.^ t?' Vlshnu Ram Bhoyer, ./^j§^pShri S. L, Bhoyer, Vy^ aged about 36 years, worldng as •./'%?"''J^~ ; .••-..y ^.' Assistant Teacher at I-rimary School, Aader, Abujttmad, Orcha, R/ o VUlage- Sarandi, Post-Saraadi, ^-^^ yjy <^ Tahsil- Antagarh, District-Katiker (Uttar Baster) (C.Q.) RESPONDENTS 1. 4. State of Cbliattisgarh, Thiough fhe Secretary Adim. Jaiti Tatha Anusuchit Jati Vikas Vitohag, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.Q.). Direotor, Adun. Jaiti Tatha Anuauchit Jati Vikas •Vibhag, Raipur (C.G.). CoUector (Adtvashl Vikas Shakha), Jagdatpur (C.G.). Assistaat Director, Aditnjaiti Tatha. Anusuchit Jati. 'Wkas 'Wbhag, Collectorate Building, Jagdalpur(Baster) (CG). ^- ^" WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OP THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA POR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATUKE QP MANDAMUS. PROHIBITION. CERTIORARJ ETC.OR AN-/ OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. Details offhe petition. PARTICUIAR OF THE PETITIONER : As per c&use title, Ai; 1 ; XI-HC-22 ra ^w^ra, "s^ft'OTS, 'f^irey 3I]^I1=BI ^WSii^T WqwafttT saSWsS5' ...M.*E<...No.t...ia 3IRSI ^RiIWafsa ^.Ffeai^T'qlti??"? fe^t ^f ii-srf^gn 3II^?I 29-7-2004 Shri Prariiant JaXswal, ^dvocate for the petitioner, Shri suahir Agrawal, Pa^iel «<frK for ^rgent Heard on I.A. No« 4496/J2004 for exen^tlon from flling tl»e typed fiopy of the docurafentSe Exemptioni from fillng the Counsel £or the petitio<»er submits that tbe Eiatter is exactly simllar to that ^ff W.P» 110. of that has been filed as A^mexure P—i« He prays for sinuLlar orders in this case also» | Counsel for the petitioitier subnits that earlier transfer order was passed as per Anijtexure P-1 dated 3-9-2003 and his iiane appeared at sr« No. l»|Xt is stated that the said transfer order has not; been | cancelledo Once a person is transferred and his transfef is not cancelled, tbere 1s no Justifi.catlon in keeping bii|> In earlier place. It is submifctei that because of I<ok Safcba elections and Vidhan Sabha election, be was not relieved aad now|the electjlons are over, therefore he may be relieved. He rell4^ on a declsl.on ia case o£ Blr Bajrang Kumar -v- State of Bihar and others, reported AIR 12fi2-^&_iaA5--AQ_i33jateafllBial^JA_^tifi_jcas&a-iBatQlYlBg '^ ^ ^ [41^ ^HS!^ XI-HC-22, sn^iqii 1?;iR?3n^i ^•)-H -R^fl t^^S^' '3^-!li*i)ciAl3l:STil«riis^(wiRig<.. W.P.MOi, 1916/2004 'RWT1I giW^i sn^i ?%iw(rftB the i.dentlcal questions, sijmilar orders sbould be passed to avoid possibility of con|tradictory JttdgemeHts in sarae case,> Havitig considered the f|acfcs and circumstaaces of tbe case and mater.i.al on recor<^ transfer order has not beenl ^ks from tfae date of production within a period o£ three we| of certified copy of this o|rder» The petltioa is accordi^igly disposed ofc Consequently, M.W.p» No| +l<<fd4^ TITtRif •? 'fe^t • ^T 3TpgT[ 311^! , it is directed tbat if tbe cancelled then he be relie*ed |. 1718/2004 also stands disposed o£, Certified copy as per r^les, Judge .<? •wr\s 'y'-^ [^tfigq