Q9 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, B!LASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.6602I2011 Nalini Eusebius, W/o Sum! Eusebius, aged about 61 years, R/o Civil Lines, Biiaspur, District Bilaspur PETlTlONER Versus RESPONDENTS 1 State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of School Education, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) District Education Officer, Biiaspur Block Development Education Officer, Kota, District Biiaspur WRIT PETITlONlUNDER ARTICLE 2260FTHE CONSTITUION - OF lNDlA Appearance : ‘ Mr. Saurabh Dangi, Counsel forthe petitioner. Mr. Prasun Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORAL ORDER (11.11.2011) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Heard. The petitioner is working on the post of Head Mistress in Middle School, Konchara, Block Kota, District Bilaspur; By the impugned order dated 19.09201 1, she has been sent to Middle School, Upka, Block Kota, District Bilaspur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid displacement of the petitioner amounts to transfer, because, her headquarter would be changed. He also submits ‘TE WRIT PETITION (S) No.6602l22011 that the petitioner is an old lady and she is going to retire within 10 months. He further submits that there is policy of the State Government that a government employee, who is to retire within 1 year, shall be posted in his/her Home District or at a place of his/her choice. The petitioner wants to remain at Konchara i He also submits that in fact, some complaint was made against the petitioner on 19.09.2011 and on the same day, the impugned order h‘as been passed. He further submits that the petitioner in fact was aggrieved by the conduct of the local panchayat members, for which, she had madea report to the Coiiector on 17.09.2011 (Annexure P/3) and then only, the aforesaid action has been taken. He prays for quashment of the impugned order dated 19.09201 1. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the above arguments. l have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have also perused the records of the writ petition. The petitioner is an old lady and she is going to retire within 10 months. ln view of the above factual aspects, l deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with a direction to the petitioner to file a representation against the impugned order dated 19.09.2011 and also with a direction to the concerned authority to dispose of the representation in an objective manner keeping in mind the grounds raised by the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that if so advised, the petitioner may file a detailed representation before the concerned authority within a period of 15 days from today along with a copy of this order and a copy of the writ petition raising her grievances and if such a representation is filed, the concerned authority shall dispose of 3 , WRIT PETlTlON (S) N0.6602l22011 the same as early as possible preferably within a period of 2 months from the date of filing of the said representation keeping in mind the policies of the State Government. lt is further directed that in the meanwhile, the petitioner shall not be relieved from her present place of posting i.e. Middle School, Konchara and sheshall be allowed to continue there. With the above observations/directions, this petition stands tinauy disposed of. There shall be no order as to cost(s). 7 s M MA Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge shyna // o , or