^ SINGLE8ENCH ^, 1 ^( •-rf ^- <<' m THB HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURBAT MLASFUR Writ Petltion No.4<$&~7^2005 PETmONER : / Jeevan Lal Burman, Agsd about 35 years, S/o Shri Sukhi Ram Biinnan, Occupation-Service, Presentfy Worldi^as Head Master m Middle School, Bajarpara, Tahsil- Baloda, District- Janjgu- Champa (C.G.). .•<. <^ ^^5 ..••" ^^kyr^' y'^^.-^ y^y .^^y ^ ^ RESPONDENTS Versus - /i. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secreteiy, School Education Departinent, Mantfalaya, Shastri Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) ^2. The ScGretaiy, General Administra.tion Department, Govt bfChhatdsgarh, D.K.S. Bhaman, MaD.tralaya, Shastri Chowk, Raq>ur (C.G.). /^. The CoUector, Distnct- Janjgir Chain.pa (C.G.). ^. The District Edueation OfBcer, District- Jaajgir Champa (C.G.). /5. Shri K. C. Patel, HeadMaster, Primaiy School, GIioghri, TahsU- Baloda, Distnct - Janjgir Champa (C.G.).' 3 y |ti lcs 1 ^ fe 1 § 08 § 10 £ ^2- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : HLASPUR Division Bench Coram: - Hon'bleShri Satish K. /^nihotri & Hon'ble Shri Manindra MohanShrivastava, JJ. Petitioner ^. Respondents WritPetitionNo.4687/2005 Jeevan Lal Burman Versus StateofChhattisgarh and others (Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India) Present: - Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Amrito Das, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER(ORALl (Passed on this 23ro day ofFebruary, 2010) Withthe consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter isheard finally. (2) By the jnstant petitron, the peUtioner has chaltenging the order dated 31-08-2005 (Annexure P-6). By virtue of the interim order dated 18-10-2005 passed by this Court.thepetitioner is continuing atthe original place of posting. No effect could be gh/en tothe impugned order dated 31-08-2005 (Annexure P- 6), due to the interim order dated 18-10-2005. @) Be that as it may, with the passage pf time, this petitton has become infructuous, as the period of transfer is not applicabte forever. At this point of time, it is not necessary to examine the legality and \@lklity of ttie impugned order. However, the respondent authorities are at liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view the adminjstrative exigency and publfc interest, if so advised, without insisting on compliance of the impugned order. Consequently. pending intertocutory application, ifany, stands disposed of. Tumane Sd/- satishK-Agnihow Iffe Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Jud^e