f^ \ H'Ti'STI r'i v^' WRIT PETITION (S) No. 3035 of2007 Smt. Krismia Khatik Aged about 43 years \V/'o. Shri Rajkapoor Kliatik At preseiit posted as CUef • Municipal Officer 'B' Class Municipal Council, Semetara, District Durg (ChSiattisgarh) ^.TT^iTrt'a^TrT' C> »i 1. State of Clihattisgarh Tlirougli the Seeretan- Departiiient of Urban Adimnistration and Deveiopment, Goverament of CbAattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director, Urban Administration aiid Deveiopment, Raipm- (C.G.) 3. Municipal Council Bemetara Throu^i Chief Mumctpal Offieer Raip-uf (C.G.) 4. Smt. Sawana Bai Sen President, Municipal Council Bemetara, District Durg, (C.G.) WRTT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITOTION OF INDIA Preserst: Sbj~> JiteadraPali, Advocateforthepetitioner. - Stei Ajay Dwivedi, Deputy Govennneiit Advocate forthe State/respondent No. 1 and 2, Miss Suiiita Jain, Advocate for the respondent No. 3. Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Advocate for the respondent Ts'o. 4. t.—th (Passed on 07UI day of May, 2008) The petitioner impugns the traiisfer order dated 27.04.2007 (Ajmexure P/ll) whereby fhe petitioner has been transferred as Chief Municipai OfBcer, Muaicipal Council, Beigetai-a to Chisf Muaicipal OfHcer, Magar Patichayat Gaurella. On heariag, aotice was issued on 11.5.2007 and the impugned tramfer order in respect ofthe petitioaer v.'as stayed. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioaer submits that t!ie petitioner has made serious allegatioas ofmalafide against the respondsnt No. 4, who happens to be tne president, Municipal Council. Bemetara. 4. 3. By virtue of interim order granted to the petitioner, the petitioner has already remained at the old place ofposting since 11.05.2007. At this stage, rt is not necessarv' to go £• i.^ A»atsryicti \r<^lliv»'* counsel for the petitioner. Eyen iffhe impugned order oftransfer is quashed, the petitioner has no riglit to continue at the same p!ace of posting in his career for ever. Be that as it may, since the petitioner has already been there for about 11 months, it is not necessaryto go into the merits ofthe ease. Leanied counsel appearing for the State submits that the compliance ofthe order impugned shall not be insisted upon. However, Uberty be granted to the State-respondent to pass any order in the public iaterest to post the petitioner at any place. In view ofthe above, this petition is disposed of with liberty reserved to fhe State-respondents to pass appropriate orders keeping in view the public interest and admimstrative exigency, if so insisting on compliance ofthe impugned tfansfer order. Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri Judge Amit ^"S--li- "I^