SiRfltB^ ^^•f^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITIONNO. ^3^^/2006 5e^-v'TC-^' PETITIONER ^y -^y Pawan Kumar Soru @ P.K. Soni, S/o Shri Geeta Rrasad Soni, aged about 32 years, oceupation service, R/o Barpali, PO. Barpali, TahsU Kartala, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ^?y^; rf'"' ^' »1pu i^' VERSUS RESPONDENTS l» . \f^ 2) .-^p v^ r*", s^- ^b \,0 ^^ ^ "" ^ 3) 41 State of Chhattisgarh through / the Secretary and Ministry of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribjes aoii Qther Backward Classes Development Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) Conunissloner, Tribal ^ Developinent Department, Ravi Shankar University Cainpus, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. The Assistant CoTrurussioner,, Tribal Development Department Korba, Chbattis^arh. Block Education Officer, Kartala, BUaspur, Chhattisgarh. WRITBETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDLA XI-HC-78 *)IHMI ShH\eh ss; ^ww^, vS\ww, Ridiyy< .^l.f..^lMj.G.^ ^ sn^rira^; (licii^<!<<.sr) 31^ST?iTft-<i°b (TW sn^r a^riqF ??(ITWflf?cT3TI^T °t>l<lfcl41-< WRff ^' tet^ ?Rl%TC ^aTRiirsn^r L-. •E? 18,8.2006 Mr. Om Prakash yadav, Advocjate for the petitioner. Mrs. <4nju Ahuja, Dy. 6ovt. Afv. for the respondents on advance copy. Heard. By the instaRt petttion the pe^titioner has chailenged his ti'ansfer order dated 30.6.2006 (Amexure P-1) wh^reby he has been transfer-red under" the Rationalization Scheme, 2006. Clause-7 of the rationciizatt^n scheme provides that if any person is aggrieved by the transfer made uncfer the rationalization scheme, then he 'is entitled to file an appeol before th^ authority mentioned in clause-7 of the scheme. Learned counsel for the pel^tioner' submits thdt appeai has atready been preferred by the petitioner <(n 17.7.2006, but the same is not being disposed of by r-espondent No.S-Con^missioner. In view of the above, tl^e petitioner has equaiiy, efficacious, aiternative remedy to redress his ^rievance and infact< the petitioner has already avaiied of •rtiat remedy, thsr^fore, The petition is not maintainable and some is dismissed. However, r-espo^ident No.Z-Commissioner is directed to decide the appeal of the petitioner af the eariiest. Consequentiy, M.(W.)P. No.33p2/06 ciso stands dismissed. L.C.Bhadoo Judge P.T.O.