$i§§§g€§ @aémh C 5" l&3‘// 1N THE HIQH COURT OF CHHATTI$6ARH AT BRASPUR Wm» Pmwmn (a No. 4485 af 2e08 / (/ PETITIONEQ: Murari Ram Bhuvarycx, $/o 5hri Jagdish Bhuvar‘ya, figed abom’ 45 years, Occupation: Service, Wor-kmg as 5ub RegisTmr, Presenfly posfed GT Pamgarh, DisTric‘r: Janjgir~€hampa, R/o Pumgarh, Dis‘h‘ic‘r: Jcmjgir-Champa (CG) - Versus n (/5:a+e of Ch haffisgur'h, Through The Secre‘mry, Depur‘rmem of Commercial Tax (kegisfm‘i’ion), D.K.S} Bhawcm, Mammlaya, Raipur (C.6.) , (Iispecfor 6eneml, Regis‘fm‘rion and‘SuperiMendenT, Smmps, Chhaffisgarh, Km‘ekx Bhawum Civi! Lines, Ruipur (C.6.) / 3. Sm‘f. Somali Bode, Sub Regis’rmr, (Office of fha Sub Regisfmr), Kurud, Disfric‘r: Dhammri (6.6) RIT PETITION UNDE§ ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE §N$TI£TUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE RIT/WRITEBJ DIRECTION8 ETC‘, IN THE NATURE OF ANDAMUS, CERTIORARI AND/0R ANY OTHER SUITABLE MT GF LIKE NATURE RESPONDENTS: i i Jun. .IL .A W C W M W . HEGH CGURT GE: CHHA??ESGH 1M” B§LASQUR wan. Mr. Justice Pmmker Biwaker; Wf%t Peiéthm $3) N0. 44%3 9f EQQBg Murari Ram Bhuvarya PETITHONER VERSUS RE3PON§ENTS State of Chhattisgarh and others. Shri Siddarth Rathore counseE for the petitioner. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur Dy. AG for the respondents/state. WRIT PETET§ON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTIQN OF lNDlA ORDER (03.07.2oo9) finaiiy. With the consent of the counsei for the parties, the matter is heard Challenge in the instant petition is to the order dated 18.2008 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.1‘ whereby the petitioner was transferred from the post of Deputy Registrar, Pamgarh, District Janjgir to the post of Deputy Registrar, Jagdaipur, District Bastar, in vioiation of the transfer poiicy. This petition was filed on 12.8.2008 and the stay was granted in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 14.8.2008. Contention of the counsei fOr the parties is that this Court may quash the impugned transfer order by giving iiberty to the respondents to pass fresh order if administrative exigency so warrants. In View of the submissions of the counsei for the respective parties ’ and iooking to the fact that the petition was fried on 12.8.2008 and stay was granted in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 14.8.2008, the impugned order dated 7.8.2008 so far as it reiates to the petitiOner is hereby quashed. However, the respondents shall be free to pass the order afresh if administrative exigency necessitates the same. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of. i g“ ,.// sdl— / Pritinker Dtwaker Judge /