CV”; ”EL: PETITIONER: S.B. {Service Matterl BILASPUR {CHHATTISGARHI WRIT PETITIOMS) No.7 19 g 12009. / Raj Kumar Jha, son of Shn‘ Sukchand Jha, aged about 38 years, posted as M.P.W. Male at P.P.Unit Maharani Hospital Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. Resgondents VCI'SHS / 1. Stafe of Chhattisgarh, Through ' Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. / 2. Director Health Services, Sanchanalaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. /3. Commissioner, Bastar Division, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. /,4. Collector, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. 5. Joint Director cum Asst. . Superintendent, Govt. Medical College, Maharani Hospital, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. ,6. Chief Medical and Health Officer, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. \ IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT Q WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE N CONSTITUTION OF INDIA w W” HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR Writ Petition (a) No. 7198 of 2009 PETITIONER : Raj Kumar Jha VERs’US RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh 85 others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226' OF THE CONS’I‘I’I‘UTION OF INDIA (SB: Hon'ble Mr. Satuh K. Apihotrl, J.) Shri C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M. P. S. Bhatia, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the respondents. v o n n E R [only [Passed on this 16th day of February, 2010) Heard. 1. The petitioner, by this petition, impugns the order dated 17.11.2009 (Annexum P/ 1), passed by the Joint Director -cum— Superintendent, whereby the yetitioner was relieved mm Maharam‘ Hospital, Jagdalpur to join in the o$oe of the Chief Medical and Health weer, Jagdalpur, in compliance of the onier dated 7.11.2009, passed by the Commissioner, Bastar Division, Jagdalpur. 2. The submission of learned counsel appealing for the petitioner is that in fact there was no nansfer order in respect of the petitioner, pursuant to which the petitioner could be relieved nom the present place of working to join the new place of posu'ng. To substantiate his submission learned counsel referred to -the oxder dated 20.11.2009 (Annexme P/9), Wheiein the Joint Director and We” Superintendent, who had relieved the petih'oner by impugned order dated 17.11.2009 (Annexure P/ 1), was asked about the nansfer order, if any, in respect of the petitioner. ~ ‘, . On 9.12.2009, notice'was issued to the respondents and time was gmnted to 1ilr return in regaxd to the submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner “that the impugned tlansfer order dated 17.11.2009 (Annexure P/ 1). iS‘not passed by a competent omcer as is clear &om the letter dated 20.11.2009 (Annexure P/ 9)”. Learned counselappearing for the respondents] State submits that admittedly, the Joint Dimctor cum Superintendent has no power to -- pass such an order but the same has been approved subsequently by Older dated 21.12.2009 (Annexm'e R/4), issued by the Deputy - Director (Avi.), Directorate, Health Services. . It is well settled principle of law that the hrst order, which has been passed without competence, cannot be reclined subsequently by the superior oEcer. Shri M: P. S. Bhatia, learned Deputy Govt. Advocate submits that liberty may be granted to the respondents] State to pass appropriate order in public interest and 7- administrative exigency. . Having regard to the facts situation, as afore~stated, the impugned order dated 1’7. 11.2009 (Annexure P/ 1) is unsustainableqHowever, liberty is Ieserved to the respondents] State to pass an order, it"so advised, in accotdance with law, in public interest and administrative exigency, Without insisting upon compliance of the earlier Older. 7. The peu'tion is allowed to the above extent. No order astocosts. r ‘satish KAgnahmra Judge n, e. .7 V Sdl- Thakur 1 .