C .^ ' lOO £) IN THE HON'BLS HIGH COURT OF JUDTCATUSS AT BILASPUR .P. f S'. No. ^,Si2- /2011 PE'riTIQNB KF'^'B. C\\-Q^.. .nWo)( ^Wf' ,^/^<^ .^z^v r^.e&^; ^ >.o' ^.;. N.K.Kashvan R/n Rhri Shnhit J?nm Kashyap Aae.d about 46 vears Occuocition —MiMtinu_moseHealth Vvrorker .Communfty HeoMh Centre, Katekahw-n District - Dantewai Sawfh Bastar !C.G.] VERSUS RESPQNBBNTS:- 7. State of Chhattisc-arh Throuah . Secretaru . Depci.rtrne.nt of Health and Familv. welfare Mantralaga, D.K.S. Bhawan- RainurfC. G..) ^2. Collector . Do.ntewo.do. District r~*/t-»^*'»'/^->i *<"i/^/-i tA/l^K^t.t^l. Sfmth Bastar (C.G.'S ^^ 3- Chief Medical and Health Officer . Danteivada, Dt". T^irs^f't'^f s >/~f^n ^^t-tf fcfcC-iA/iACfi.d, Sox^h Bastar fC-G. WRJT PBTTTTON UNSER ARTICLE 226/227 OF TffE CGNSTITUT10N OF INDIA ^^ ashok PETITIONER RESPONDENTS H!GKCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 6812 OF 2011 N.K. Kashyap Versus StateofChhattisgarh & Others ^ (Writ Petition underArticle 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India) Singte Bench : Hon'ble ShriSatish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Ms.Deeoali Pandev, Advooate for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Government Advocate for the State. 3. 4. ORDER Passsd on this 23rd day of November, 2011) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 27.08.2011 (Annexure P/1), the petitioner, working as IVIultipurpose Health Worker at Community Health Centre, Katekalyan, District Dantewada, has been transferred to Community Health Cenlre, Nagri, District Dhamtari, on his own request. However, the petitioner has not yet been relieved to join the new place of posting. Ms. Pandey, further submits that once the oider of transfer has been passed, it is for the govemment to ensure that it is complied with immediately. She relies on a decision of the Supreme Court in Sreedam Chandra Ghosh v. State of Assam & others, 'm support of her contention that if the order is not complied with, a direction can be 'issued for enforcement thereof. 2. Shri Sao, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State/ respondents subm'rts that if the transfer order dated 27.08.2011 (Annexure P71) isstilt in existence and has not been complied with,appropriate steps would be taken to comply with the order. If the aforesaid transfer order is stitl in existence and no other order has been passed, the government is under an obligation to comply with the same at •" once. It is accordingly directed that the transfer order shall be complied with forthwith, wrthin a period oftwoweeks. Accordinglv, this cetition stands disposed of. _, '(1996V10SCC567 Sd/- SATBH K. ANGNIHOW Judge