^^^^^ -...-•;"^^%.z:)-..-••••"" ^•""'^..^^Kcv'ty-'"" ^•vv . »n'^ ''n'0\' 'i"" "y^ev"^>'"' s-v THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITION (S) NQ.^<&3^_ ^006 w- P. R. Sahu, S/o- Shri L.R. Sahu, Aged about 42 years, Presently working as ChiefExecutive Officer, Janpad Panchayat - Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. State ofChhattisgarh, Through- Secretary, Deptt. ofSC, ST & Tribal Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Shri R.K. Sharma, ChiefExecutive Officer, Janpad Panchayat - Charama, Distt. Kanker, RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. CERTIORARI ETC. XI-HC-78 STI^Tw R-ii* TOT3IR^Tstit|l«t> 35T ^ll'ill'M'M, ^Tny'IS, Rlcliy^ WHC^T Sti*ir<t» W! 200 sn^nRra? (^3g^8T) ??arw:^rf?cT3iicS?T 10.8.2006:- Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, c<lunsel for the petitloner. Shri Satish Gupta, Deputy (p .A. for the State, on advance copy. Heard. By the instant petition, th^ The case of the petitioner The petitioner's grievance] Sickle Cell Anemia, therefore, transfusion 3-4 times in a year. A| make a representation to th^ inw\v\<S[-\ KWriTfr'fel<a <Ri+<i< ^si^Tsn^r petitioner has challenged his transfer order Annexure-P/1 dated 28th Jui]ie 2C»6as well as the order dated 21-7- 2006 whereby the representation <t>f the petitioner is rejected. s that the petitioner is working as Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panch^yat, Nagri and vide order dafed 28-6- 2006 he has been transferred on t[ie post ofCEO at Keshkal. is that his daughter issuffering from she is required to undergo blood [:cordingly, the petitioner was atlowed to State/respondent which has been considered bythe State and sam^ has been rejected vide order dated 21- 7-2006 mentioning therein that C^iamtari is at a distance of 64 km from Nagri whereas, Keshkal is 65 km both the places are at equidistanci Learned counsel for the p] Keshkal from Dhamtari is 95 incorrect. Having heard learned counl aspect argued by learned counsel be 95 km from Keshkal, Keshkal Nagri is in the interior area, therel Keshkal is not going to make mud [rom Dhamtari and as per the Secretary, etitioner submitted that the distance of ^m, therefore, the impugned order is ^el for the parties, 1 have considered the for the petitioner. Even if it is taken to falls on theNational Highway whereas, pre, reaching to Dhamtari from Nagri or fh difference, as such the petition of the P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3^ '^nw<i, wTftv'w, Rldltiy< HI*<(^TShNlcb W3; 200 3T(^Tt|ach ((^clf^«<i^tT) sn^r^rfs^ aW3TR?Tsh>1 Ban/e ^ STOTwnferan^T -^, petition^r is devold of meiit." Moi the same is outcome of malafide o In the result, the writ petit hereby dismissed. Consequently, iyi.(W.)P. Nq stand disposed of. *i<<rci<fl-f iiiciTffte'^l'tKiwK ^sri^iiTan^r ^uvei, Ihu liaiibfyr caii be chaltenged if l' contrary to the statutory rules. lon is liable to be dismissed and it is 1.3134/2006 and I.A. No.7558/2006 also L.C.Bhadoo Judge •^ p