gingh genah 2» éF/gak RESPONEENTS: EN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR, CHHATTI$GA§H wrw’ mafien Ng. $669" of 2906 3c9a‘i’ Namycm Mish m, 3/0 Law RL. Mishm, Aged abom’ 46 years, Occupm'ion: Service, PreSenHy posted as Accounfanf in Principal Pre Examinafion Training Cen‘rre, Biiaspur, R/o Swim? Road, Sarknndu, Biiuspur', Chhaf‘iisgm‘h. — Versus ~ 5mm of Chha’riisgcrh,/ Through irha Secremry‘ Scheduled Casizs (3i Schaduieci Tribes‘ Weifare Depur-‘rmeni’, i Mammiaya, D.K.S, Bhawam Raipur‘f Chhqtfisgar‘h. Cammiigsioner‘/ Scheduied Casies <S: Scheduled Tribes Welfare Deparfmen'i’, 60W. of Chhah‘iswrh, Raipur', Chhaffisgarh. Coiiecior, Biiaspur, / Disfricfi Biiaspur', Chha‘r‘riggarh. Assis‘mn’r Commissioner,/’ Tribal Welfare, Damewada, Dis‘irici: Daniewadu, Chhm‘risgorh. Ganesh Ram Bhaga‘i Miriisfer fer Tribal Development 3TaTe of Chhaf‘risgarh, Raipur, €hl1cxh‘isgarh. / / WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTECL§ 226/227 GF THE CONSTETUTIGN OF ENDIA OR E5SUANCE OF APPROPRIATE W§ITIWRITS DIRECTIONS ETC‘. EN THE NAEURE GF MANDAMU5, CERTEORARI AND/OR ANV OTHER $UITABLE WRIT OF LEKE NATURE F HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Single Bench : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker Writ Petition No. 5002 of 2606 Jagat Narayan Mishra PETITIONER Versus RESPONDENTS state of Chhattisgarh & others. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, counsel for the netitioner. Shri Arvind Dubey, Panel LaWyer far the :‘State. Shri A.S. Kachhwaha, counsei for respondent No. 5‘ WRIT PETITHON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTiTUTiON OF iNDiA ORDER (03.07.2009) With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard ttnatiy. Challenge in the instant writ petition is to the order dated 26.8.2006 (Annexure—P-Q) passed by State Government whereby the petitioner was transferred -from Pre Examination Training Centre, Biiaspur to the Govt. Model Higher secondary School, Dantewada; in violation of the transfer policy. This Court entertaining the grievance of the petitioner had . granted stay in his favour vide order dated 13.9.2006. in View of the fact that this petition was filed on 8.9.2006 and stay was also granted in favour of the petitioner, the transfer order, so far as it relates to the petitioner is hereby quashed. However, the State Government would be at liberty to pass an order if the administrative exigency so warrant. With the above observation, the petition stands disposed l , 8di— Pritinker Diwaker of. l l Judge l t