M ^3 ^•^-^s^ ^se. S""GIE P;e^>>Y^g?^:;......,,.»... daied-^a""""~T ^ ,J- BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.NO. S8o& Of 2006. t-,.•^ .fe u PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^v A^ ^y y^ Hetram Karsh, son ofTirithram Karsh, aged about 36 years, resident ofVUlage /-^ Bilaspur Sarsiva, Block Bilaigarh, Distt. Raipur (Chhattisgarh), VE R SU S :- 1. StateofChliattisgarh,Throughthe ^ Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Manta'alaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), 2. ChiefMedical and Health OfBcer, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), 3. Block Medical Officer, Primary Health Center, Bilaigarh, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh). ov^ v>'' PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTIONOF INDIA DETAILS OF PETITION :- XI-HC-78 qiNini sh*11^» ssT^iTEiraq', ®tnu'is,Ricii+iy w^ •'^^p- •'3 &°•^ • ^ 200^ 3 3T1^?T 4a<*> (yiI^<sii^<T) STI^T^TR.ii'h ?raT3n^?Ts»iHiq> ^aTWHferan^T °hi<<f<n<fl'< iiiMTffteiA<Rit<i< ^sri^iTsn^T 4.8.2006:- Shri 1-I.B. Agrawal, Sr. A^vocate with iss Sangeeta Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner". Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Sov^rnment Advocote for the Stote/ respondents, on advance copy. Heard both the counsel. By the instant petition, the; order doted 7-7-2006 whereby petitioner has challenged his transfer he has been transferred from Sub l-1ealth Centre, Bilaspur (Bilaigarh|) to Communit/ l-1eafrh Centre, Kasdol on administrotive ground. The main grievance raised t^y the petitioner in this writ petition is thot he has been subjected to fre|quent transfers. In the year 2000,he was transferred from Raikona to |Bhotgoon and again the petitioner was transferred from Bhafgaon to Per^dravan and same was complied by the petitioner. On 10-3-2003, the| petitioner was transferred from Pendravan to Bilaspur (Bilaigarh) dpd now, he has been transferred vide impugned order to Kasdol. Having heard leamed coun^!el for the part-ies and having perused the record, the last transfer of 1^he petitioner was made on 10 March 2003 and after about 3 years fljnd 4 months this transfer has been effected, therefore, the said tTansfer does not come under the category of frequent transfers. P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3ST '<ll<<lcl<f, ®Tn<H'l(o,Rlfll^y *II*1C1I S.bHlch W^ 200 3T(^?T<<s(«h (yil^'i.^) sn^T^rf^iq; (rarsii^TTsbiit) ?CTTWHfN'3TI^T —' (^. 'oi'iifci'ifl'i wicff ff fscS d»reeR ^srf^R'sn^T Barve No^ Learned counsel for the js a low paid employee and he complaint, therefore, the petit| r'epresentation to respondent game, to which learned counsel for[ Having heard leamed couns^ facts and circumstances of the on the merit of the case, the petitioner is just, fair and reas^i allowed to make a detailed petition to respondent No.2 wfithin| turn, respondent No.2 is direct^d petitioner within a period of 30) representation, after considering in accordonce with law. With the dir'ection aforesaiill, Consequently, M.(W.)P. No.2^ Parties are entitled pe^itioner submitt'ed that the petitioner has been transferred without any oner may be allowed to make a and he be directed To decide the [re^pondents has no objection. for the parfies, having regard to the and without expressing any opinion made by learned counsel for the (nable. Therefore, the petitioner is along with a copy of this |a period of 10 days from today and in to decide representation of The days from the date of receipt of i|ill the points raised by the petitioner, cotse prcfyer repr^sentation I, the petition stands disposed of. P66/2006 also stands disposed of. for cerlfified copy of this order. Sd/- L.C.Bhadoo Judge Sk P.T.O.