0) C 57/ \KD7W 3IMGLE 5mm IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION ( s ) No. 6H %/ 0f 2010 PETITIONER: /Saheb Lal Markam S/o Late Indal Singh Markam, aged about 59 years; occupation— service, Tahsildar, posted at Office of Tahsildar Churiya, District Rajnandgaon (CG). Versus / RESPONDENTS: 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, y/s {YO wgyvx Mantralay Revenue at D.K.S. Bhawan, a; Department, Raipur (CG). g 2. The Commissioner, Land Records, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (CG). ( 3. The Collector, (CG). Rajnandgaon WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 8 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH 2 BILASPUR £ WRIT PETITION (S) NO.6481 OF 2010 Petitioner Saheb Lal Markam Versus Respondents The State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :— Shri Rakesh Anthony, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N.N. Roy, Panel Lawyer forthe State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 12”“ day of January, 201 1) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 18.1 1.2009 (Annexure P/1) issued by the respondent No. 1, so far it relates to the petitioner and further quashing of the relieving order dated 26.10.2010 (Annexure P/2) issued by the respondent No. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working on the post of Tahsildar, Churiya. has been transferred to District Narayanpur vide the impugned order dated 18.11.2009 (Annexure P/1). The respondent No. 3, instead of relieving the petitioner for joining at Narayanpur, vide order dated 02.12.2009, posted the petitioner as Tahsildar Churiya. Later on, the respondent No. 3, by order dated 08.02.2010 appointed the petitioner as Census Officer, Churiya. 3. Shri Anthony further submits that by way the impugned relieving order dated 26.10.2010, the petitioner has been directed to'get himself relived after handing over the charge of Tahsildar, Churiya when he is at the fag end of his retirement as only four months are left. Arun The question asto whether an employee engaged in Census may be transferred before completion of Census work, came up into consideration before this Court in Chandrika Prasad Sinha v. State of Chhattisgarh’ along with other connected matters. This Court having considered all the aspects of the matter held that an employee engaged in the Census may not be disturbed prior to its completion. Accordingly, the writ petition filed by several employees was allowed. 5. Shri Anthony further submits that the issue involved herein is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in the above-stated cases. 6. Shri Roy, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the order impugned herein was passed on 18/1 1/2009 (Annexure PM) before appointment of the petitioner as Census Officer on 08/02/2010. However, the petitioner does not dispute the fact that when the petitioner has appointed as Census Officer, he was working as Tahsildar Khairagarh, District— Rajnandgaon. 7. Having regard to the fact situation of the-case, the impugned order passed dated 18.11.2009 (Annexure P/1) in respect of’the petitioner is quashed. Consquently, the relieving order dated \ l 26/10/2010 (Annexure P/2) is also quashed. lt is directed that the petitioner may continue at the same place till the work of Census is complete. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition isdisposed of. No order asto costs. Sd/- t Satish K. Agnihotri’ ll, Judge ‘W.P,(S) No.3444 of 2010 (decided on 05/10/2010)