ssStS^ ^J <^ s^~ ^g ^s ^i^ •^ IN THE fflGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. h^>'^ OF 2010 PETITIONER ^'fec.. ^^i" ^<.^-':/ov\^ ...•••3^J-"" ^y..^ ^.c^":....-"" ^-"" RESPONDENTS 1^"-"^ [^sx^^!%| ^ ''&! ^ ^ '^^€/ Geeta Kumari W/o Shri Tirku Ram, aged about 20 years, occupation service, posted as Panchayat Karini at Gram Panchayat Mohanpur, R/o. Gandhi Nagar Near Praveen Memorial School Fundurdihari Ambikapur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District - Sarguja (C.G.) VERSUS ^" 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Panchayat Department, D. K. S, Building Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.). ^ 2. 3. t/" Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Ambikapur, Distt.- Sarguja (C.G.). Madan Mohan , Panchayat Karmi, Gram Panchayat Jagdishpur, Distt.- Ambikapur ( C.G.) WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSITITUTION OF INDIA L...^,- (g^ c HIGH_CgURTQFCHHATTi^ WRJTJPETrrjON(Sl_N0.4587QF2Q10 PETITIONER Geeta Kumari RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others Arun (yVrit Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitutton of Indlla) Single Bench : Hon'bte Shrs Satish K. AgnShotrS, J. Present:- Shri Awadh Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N.N. Roy, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDERfQRAD (Passed on thjs 3rd day ofMarch, 2011) 1. Heard leamed counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks to chaUenge ttie iegaMty and vaiidtty of the order dated 15/07/2010 (Annexure P/1) by which the petitjoner has been transferred from Mohanpur, Ambikapur to Jagdishpur, Ambikapur. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the petitioner has aiready continued at the original place of posting for more Vtmn 6 months on account of interim order dated 16/08/2010 granted by thte Court. The State/respondents may be granted liberfy to pass appropriate orders , keeping in view public interest and administrative exigency. Learned counsel further submits that the State/respondents shall not insist upon comptiance of the impugned order dated 15/07/2010 (Annexure P/1). It js accordingly ordered. 4. Since no effect could be given to the impugned order dated 15/07/2010 (Annexure P/1) on account of the interim order dated 16/08/2010, it is not necessary to go into the fegaljty and validity of the impugned ordter dated 15/07/2010 (Annexure P/1), in the facts ofthe case. 5. In view of the above, according to leamed eounsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in tihis petition for adjudication atthis stage. 6. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. No order asto costs. Sat.*K-Agnibotrl Judge