P Q BEFORE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No?§?/L 12010 PETITIONER VERSUS RESPONDENTS u0‘ Through: the Secretary, Sports and Youth Welfare Department, DIK.S. Bhawan, Raipur (0G) Director, Directorate of Sports and Youth Welfare, Khel Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Superintendent of Police, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4. State of Madhya Pradesh, Through: the Secretary, Sports and Youth Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (C.G.) 5. Madhya Pradesh Council of Sports. Through:— Secretary, URI Singh, S/o late Shri S. Singh, aged about 59 years, R/o 48, New Civil Lines, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) I» i Council of Sports T.T. Nagar Stadium, Bhopal (MIR) 6‘ Union of lndia, Through: the Secretary, Ministry of Public Grievance, Social Welfare and Pension, Khan Market, Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi @w : \Q'A. State of Chhattisgarh, \ g <<m: UmddOZ CZUmm >m,_._0_.m wwmO.”aim OOZwH_._.C._._OZ OT. _ZO_>. AT BILASPUR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGAM‘I Writ I’etitiOn !S) No. 2596 of 2010 PETITIONER U.R.Singh. / VERSUS _ ' ‘ RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Othars. Post for pronouncement of judgment & order on ,, .ggé‘éy of i” February, "" 201 :/ 1. VERSUS \ RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF : K ’ e r—H‘ . ' ' . \ the petitoner as absorbed and accordingly the etitier was herete i pon tafr posted as District Sports and Youth Welfare fficer, at Korba O Annexure P/3) vide order dated 09.07.1999. Suequently y order ( bs, b daed 09.06.000 (Annure P/5), he petitier was tnsferred from t 2 ex t on ra b p er & h We Kora and osted at Kank as District Sports Yout lfare Offcer. Pursuan to the creation the State of Chhattisgarh, the i t of petitioner, working as District Sports & Youth Welfare Officer, ent s is const f allocation to the State of Chhattisgrh on 28.1 1.2000 h en or a (nnexure /6). No order on his nsent was pasd nd the petitioner A P co se a ft 05 of of was thereaer again transferred on 11..2005 from the fice Superintdent of Police, Kanker to the o of Superintennt of en ffice de Police, Kawardha, on e same ost. gain, by er ated th p A ord d 3.1 1 .2007, the petitioner, while posted at Du, as ransfere to the 0 rg w trd f p B a office o Suerintendent of Police, Kanker as adminton Coach. Lter on id d h a , ve order date 30.06.2008 (Annexure P/9), te petitioner ws again transferred from the office uperintendnt f Police, Kanker of Se o t Rajnangn on the post o Badminton Coach. While te petioner o dao f h ti s worn as Badminton Coach a Raandaon, the imugned rder ad .5.2010 was passe o dte 100 d. . hri ajumdar, learned consel ppeing for the petitioner, would S M u aar sumit that ince the etition wa never allocad to te Stat of b s per s te h e dhya radesh, thus, th etitioner cann b sent to te State o Ma P e p ot e h f aya Pdeh by the ipugned order. Shri ajumdar wou further Mdh ras m M ld ~ sbt ha bef on umi tt ore creation of the State of Chhattisgarh, the petitier wa kig t jng p was posted within the territorial jurisdiction of the Chhattisgarh State only and as such, under the provisions of law, the petitioner is deemed to have been allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh. . On the other hand, Shri Bhaduri, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent No. l to 3 would submit that the petitioner is not a government servant and he was appointed purely on temporary basis as Badminton Coach on 14.01.1976 (Annexure R/l). However, Shri Bhaduri would accept the factual aspects, as stated above, by the petitioner in regard to his postings and transfers. Shri Bhaduri would next contend that the petitioner was never absorbed in the government service and he remained an employeeof the Madhya Pradesh Sports Council. A list of allocated government servants was published on 29.7.20002 (Annexure R/4) wherein the name of the petitioner did not ind place. The petitioner, by order dated 24.08.2001 was transferred f by the Government of Chhattisgarh, Department of Labour, Sports & Youth Welfare, whereby the petitioner working as District Sports & Youth welfare Officer, Kanker was relieved and directed to join in the office of Director, Sports & Youth Welfare, Bhopal. The said order was challenged before this Court in W.P. No. 1651/2001, which was disposed of vide order dated 18.09.2001 (Annexure R/5). The interim order dated 3.09.2001, granted in the said writ petition was continued for a further period of one month, whereby the effect and operation of the order dated 24.08.2001 was suspended. Thereafter, on 10.07.2003 (Annexure R/6), the order of relieving the petitioner for joining in the ta of Ma P r .020 d Ste adhy radesh Vide orde dated 285.03, was cancelle and he titioner continue thereafter in te State of Chhattisgarh, t pe d h Hoever, no action has been taken till date. The etitioner remas to w p in be an employee of he Madhya Prades Sports Council. Thus, this t h peition eserves to be smissed. t d di . Having eard learned cnsel aparing for the prts, perused the h ou pe aie lding nd documents pended thereto. peas a ap h s ar m he 8 . Te facts, a aforestated, e aditted. T petitioner on 2.11.2000 (Anexe R/3) wrote a lett to the Principa Secretary, Spts and nur er l or h en da h in ha Yout Welfare Departmt, Mahy Prades, Bhopal statg tt since the petitioner was absorbed in the Government service and thereafter, he has been posted throughout in the State of Chhattisgarh, he may be allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh. Again, on 05.03.2001, the petitioner reiterated the same thing. However, no order was passed in his case, except in case of allocation of Dr. M.P.George, on 29.07.2002 (Annexure R/4). The list of fmal State Cadre employees does not include the name of the petitioner. It indicates that no order was passed in case of the petitioner in respect of his allocation. This court did not interfere with the order dated 24.08.2001 whereby he was directed to join the office of the Director, Sports and Youth Welfare, Bhopal. Despite that, the petitioner was not relieved by the State of Chhattisgarh as order dated 28.05.2003 for relieving the petitioner was cancelled subsequently on 10.07.2003. The petitioner thereafter continued in the State of Chhattisgarh. 7. So far as question of the fact asto whether the petitioner is a government employee or not, the same cannot be decided on the basis of the facts available in the pleadings. But it is an admitted position that all the orders of transfer and posting has been passed by the State Government. The letter dated 09.07.1999 (Annexure P/3) and 23.08.1999 (Annexure P/4) clearly indicate that the petitioner was an employee of the State Government. In the event, there is no allocation of an employee, section 70 of the Madhya Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2000 (for short ‘the Act, 2000’) provides for status ofthe employee. Section 70 of the Act, 2000, reads as under: “70. Provisions as to continuance of officers in same post. — (1) Every person who, immediately before the appointed day is holding or discharging duties of any post or office in connection with the affairs of the existing State of Madhya Pradesh in any area which on that day falls within any of the successor State, and shall be deemed, on and from that day, to have been duly ppointed to the post or office by the Government of, or any other appropriate authority in, that successor state: Provided that nothing in this section shall be deemed to be prevent a competent authority, on and from the appointed day, from passing in relation to such person any order affecting the continuance in such post or office.” . a 9. On bare perusal of the above provision, it is clear that if the petitioner, immediately before the appointed day i.e. 01.1 1.2000, was holding or discharging his duties of his post in the State of Chhattisgarh, he shall continue to hold the same office of the successor State i.e. the State of Chhattisgarh. Thus, at this stage, without there being a proper allocation, the petitioner cannot be sent to the State of Madhya Pradesh for taking action under the provisions of Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966. When the impugned order was passed, the petitioner was posted at Rajnandgaon as Coach. 10. So far as other prayer of the petitioner with regard to grant of all the benefits of promotion, upgradation _or increment is concerned, the same shall be considered by the State of Chhattisgarh as no materials with regard to the above has been produced’except bare averments made in the writ petition. Thus, no direction can be issued in this regard. However, if a representation is made to the State of Chhattisgarh, the State authorities may consider the same in accordance with law, on its own merits and perspective. ll.In view of the above, the impugned orders dated 30.04.2010 (Annexure P/l) and 10.05.2010 (Annexure P/12) are quashed. 12. The writ petition is allowed in part, to the above extent. 13. There shall be no order asto costs.