HlGHCOUR'rORtShtl-laaaglS^XRH.BIl.ASPUR ^^ (S.B.: HQN'BLEMR.yuSTieESUNILKUMA^SINHAl PETrTIOJNER RESPONDENTS n:i w W.P.(S) N©^697/2016 @il8Bant!f^el»agecj al®ut;58yea S/0^yc|^138tel;,pQstedasPa'lwranat P.HgNosS^T'iJssayr; Tahsil-Passaur, ^ Bi^rjct? Raigarh ^(e.G.^ %lgi, fos^Chikhali, Tahsil^ P^ District Raigarh (C.G.) Vereus 1 State Qf GhhattisgaFh, Throygh : the Secretary, Department of Revenue, D.K.S.Bhawan,Raipur(C.G.) 2 Under Secretary, Department of Revenue, D.K.S. Bhawain, Raipur 3 CQllector, Raigarh, District Raigarh 4 Deputy Collector, Raigarh, District Raigarh(C;G.) 5 Charge QfRcer »& Tahsilclar, Ru DistricrRaigarhp.G.) 6 jQint Director^ ^GoyernrniHt; ^ Inclia, Mjnistry^ Census Qperations^^ M^ Jangadna Bliawan, Jail Road, Bhopal (M.P4::''/;.;..,:' ,^ 7 Deputy Dii^or, GoiyermTlent of Iridja, Ministry of^c'm&^^ji^, SireGtorate^^^^ Census ©perations^^^^^^ ^ Gamp^BlTO|:)a|( y|in0a8^ ,,;^:.;;Road,f:BftoSal);:(M*P,)^.';1:..,;,'^ WRlTPETIflONUNDERAR$l(£l.i^21WR%MECJ@NS^I.CTI@ .:;<iNDI%M:?;':' :':;:';°^.'^ ADDearanGe: •• .'.'•:.\;./ ..':••''':...:''''^^ Mr.^hailendra BajRai,^yQGate|fG)!lEhe petjtjoner, Mr.Yashv^tSiingh^|iakur,3l^^»(^gtei^^n^ 'Dep,Go»emme;|it^dMOGate^ig|ie^|Stati|?i^|E3r^en^1^ Mr. R:Rradhan,AdvQGafe^RlJHi<3r?:of?lFic|ia/i^s^ iflittiRtti-WBitllrHtfaiBiiiiS'iiii'iiiniiail"'"'"" ' "-'•' '-'•""• -Si ;!"y -•. ' '">, %^-^ I W.P.(S1N046&7/2010 ORDER (05.1Q.2010) For the reasons stated jn the orderdated 05.10.2010, simultanebusly passed ih W.R.(S) NQ.3444/2010, by which, e said petitjon has beenallowed.this petition js also allowed and the impygned orderoftFansferQfthepetitionerisherebyquashed. Noorderas tocost(s). S1tin1aKamarS"^ Iti" w., ti ''a HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR (Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Sinha) W.P.(S) No. 3444 of 2010 Chandrika Prasad Sinha Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Following batch ofW.P.(S) Nos.:- 3866/2010, 4211/2010, 4368/2010, 4437/2010, 4571/2010, 4061/2010, 4121/2010, 4419/2010, 4792/2010, 4813/2010, 5041/2010, 5180/2010, 3875/2010, 4238/2010, 4392/2010, 4497/2010, 4582/2010, 4079/2010, 4153/2010, 4579/2010, 4803/2010, 4866/2010, 5042/2010, 5225/2010 3881/2010, 4242/2010, 4421/2010, 3989/2010, 4003/2010, 4091/2010, 4154/2010, 4674/2010, 4804/2010, 4926/2010, 5062/2010, & 5310/2010. 3884/2010, 4266/2010, 4433/2010, 3991/2010, 4057/2010, 4107/2010, 4155/2010, 4697/2010, 4805/2010, 4992/2010, 5106/2010, 4210/2010, 4366/2010, 4435/2010, 4550/2010, 4060/2010, 4114/2010, 4216/2010, 4718/2010, 4812/2010, 5038/2010, 5138/2010, ORDER Post for Order: 05/1.0/2010 -&_Q_ Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge •\n HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR (SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR SINHA) W.P.(S) N0.3444 of 2010 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Chandrika Prasad Sinha Son of Late Shri Ganesh Ram Sinha, aged about 56 years, Revenue Inspector, Revenue Circle Tilda, Tahsil Tilda, District Raipur (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh, through : the Secretary, Revenue Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur The Secretary, General Administration Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) The Commissioner, Land Record Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) The Collector, Land Record Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) The Collector, Land Record Korba, District Korba (C.G.) The Tahsildar, Tahsil Tilda, District Raipur(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearance: Mr. V.K. Pandey, Advocate forthe petitioner. Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, Dy. Advocate General and Mr. U.N.S. Deo, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents '^<K^;di s^ssy '•SS.S^... W.P.rS) No. 344<Qf ORDER (05.10.2010) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA. J. (1) By this order, the present writ petition and the following batch of writ petitions will be disposed of as common points have been raised in these matters:- W.P.(S) Nos: 3866/2010, 3875/2010, 3881/2010, 3884/2010, 4210/2010, 4211/2010, 4238/2010, 4242/2010, 4266/2010, 4366/2010, 4368/2010, 4392/2010, 4421/2010, 4433/2010, 4435/2010, 4437/2010, 4497/2010, 3989/2010, 3991/2010, 4550/2010, 4571/2010, 4582/2010, 4003/2010, 4057/2010, 4060/2010, 4061/2010, 4079/2010, 4091/2010, 4107/2010, 4114/2010, 4121/2010, 4153/2010, 4154/2010, 4155/2010, 4216/2010, 4419/2010, 4579/2010, 4674/2010, 4697/2010, 4718/2010, 4792/2010, 4803/2010, 4804/2010, 4805/2010, 4812/2010, 4813/2010, 4866/2010, 4926/2010, 4992/2010, 5038/2010, 5041/2010, 5042/2010, 5062/2010, 5106/2010, 5138/2010, 5180/2010, 5225/2010& 5310/2010. (2) The facts, briefly stated, are as under:- Admittedly, the petitioners have been appointed as Enumerators/Supervisors/Charge Officers etc. for conducting the work of Census 2011. Their appointments have been made under sub-section (4) of Section 4 of the Census Act 1948 (37 of 1948). While discharging their duties as Charge Officers/Enumerators/ Supervisors etc., the petitioners have been transferred from their present places of posting to the other places by the State/Authorities of their Departments in which they are holding W.P.('S')No.3444 their substantive posts. The petitioners have challenged the validity of their transfer orders on many grounds. However this Court entertained the writ petitions and issued notices on the ground that the petitioners were appointed as Charge Officers/Enumerators/ Supervisors etc. in Census 2011 and they have been assigned to perform their duties as such officers, therefore, they cannot be transferred unless the work of Census is over and their transfer by the respective authorities of their Department during the pendency of census work was in violation of the Census Rules 1990. (3) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that looking to the nature of work assigned to the petitioners, the State Government has also issued a circular dated 5 June, 2010 and it has been directed to all the department concerned that the Government servants engaged in census work shall not be transferred from their present place of posting to any other place without the consent of Principal/District Census Officer. Their submission is that this circular has been ignored and violated by the authorities of the concerned department ofthe petitioners and the impugned transfer orders have been issued. (4) The State has filed its return in the present writ petition and it has been prayed that the same may be taken as the return in all the writ petitions listed in the bunch. The State has admitted the factual aspects and has submitted that it will not insist upon transfer of officers, employees, enumerators (Pragnak), supervisors and charge officers up to 31.3.2011 without the consent of the Principal/District Census Officer. (5) In view of the above return filed by the State, learned counsel for the petitioners have prayed for quashment of the impugned transfer •y^ \^.. ^fw^ ^ W.P.<S) No. 3444 oMSlQJ- orders, as according to them, the petitioners are continuing at their present places of posting on the strength of interim orders granted in their favour by this Court. Their submission was that if the impugned orders are not quashed, the State may insist upon the petitioners to go to their transferred places after 31.3.2011 which cannot be done because once an order is held to be bad-in-law, the State cannot insist upon to carry that order. (6) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also perused the records of the writ petitions. (7) There is no dispute that the petitioners have been appointed as Charge Officers/Enumerators/Supervisors etc. in Census 2011. Their appointments are statutory appointments under sub-section (4) of Section 4 of Census Act 1948 (37 of 1948) and are subject to the provisions of the Census Rules 1990. Rule 8 of the aforesaid Rules 1990 gives power to the State Government and Union Territory Administration for issuance of Notifications, Orders and Instructions for the purposes of conducting the work of census. Sub-rule (vi) of Rule 8 provides that the State Government and Union Territory Administration, as the case may be, shall impose restrictions on the Head of Department/Officer on the transfer of officers/officials once appointed as Supervisor/Enumerator, without the proper consent of Principal/District Census Officer. In pursuance of the above provisions of Rule 8 (vi), the State of Chhattisgarh has issued a circular dated 5th of June, 2010 (Annexure- R/5&6/3) which reads as follows:- '•A. 1^ "I ^ B '"8 s' .y .-S •'^; W.P.('S')No.3444of2010 "y^lt1<l<B ?IRFT WII^T TORFT 1^1PT :: Wiv\{\:: ^s cbciiiui Rrg qq;T, 'i?ray ^ITcp ^)/1-2/2010/1-6 ffRr, ^Tqy, f^T 5 u^, 2010 \J1T1<I"IT1I ?IRTrT c^ WTO ^IPT, wr^r mi^ii^cM, ^TTCT ^TTTTSTgr, ^WRT f^'rTTSTffT ymlti<i<i RTO:-VJFFTTIHT - 2011 ^ dp\^ SltorRqf T^T ch^TllRill' ^ WHP^ROT -^ ^TO^ 1 '?iw? w^ gm fN?r f^TT ^PTT t viTi^i"irii f?Trm 1990 ^ f?RR 8 (vi) ^ 3T3'flT? ^FF'HT-2011 ^ f^T? y)T1Jlulr1l ^Pf ^ ^N<? SltoRqf ^ cr»4qiR<<1', Tipic^, >^4'<qi^ui< ^ sn^w ^r ^TRraw fSf^r/feR^ ^tRT W\^W ^ W^ ^ tol f^P 31.3.2011 ^W ^t f^TT ufRT l 2/ c^pTT ^(vf f^ft zpr qic^f ^piRzid f^qT uTT^ | U^ltf41(»^ WiWv\ ^ ^TPT ^ crar sii^ii'i.tiK, (c^.SIR. ftw) ^RT^fcT y^l'H'id w^ TRTRFT f^TFT ^. W^ ?P 1-2/2010/1-6 Wiy, f^f^ 5 ^f, 2010 yRlRiR -^HTsfsT^r i 1. ffg^ ^fer, ^TFi^r 'g®ffl^t,»n?l'9<i(»?IRT-T, ^OTTCTO, '?ray i 2. 'V^I, V^. •5IIW, i^ fNTT ^t ST^ ^I^ ^T ^lfcf) 112 f^t^ 01.6. 2010 ^ w^ Tr ^r i 3. 'g^i ^fer ^ ^n? snfew, ww^, ^rqy i 4. f^ 1a?T!?cf)/f^r ^fer, WTRT TIPT. •4^Tm yi^l'a'i<?, wry l 5. '^raTdcf), ui'1'tiqct), -^qy ] ^tgcRT ^R Bwft^Tre?TRH W1PT W\\W fNFT" W.P.CS) No. 3444 of (8) It is therefore clear that the persons engaged in census work in the above capacity have been given due protection by the statutory Rules in the matter of their transfer during the period of work of census and if an order of transfer is passed by their Head of Department or the concerned authority or the Government, without the consent of the authorities mentioned in Rule 8 (vi), that would be an action in violation of the aforesaid statutory Rule and the same would not be sustained in law. In the present matters, no documents have been filed by the State to show that any consent or sanction was obtained by the concerned .authorities under RuleS (vi) of the Rules 1990 and in this manner impugned orders are passed against the above statutory Rules. (9) Census provides information at grassroot level. The information provided by the Census are helpful to determine number of seats in Parliamentary/Assembly Constituencies, Panchayat and other local bodies. It is also helpful to determine the boundaries of such Constituencies. The Indian Census is the most credible source of information on Demography (Population characteristics), Economic Activity, Literacy & Education, Housing and Household Amenities, Urbanization, Fertility and Mortality, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, Language, Religion, Migration, Disability and many other socio- cultural and demographic data since 1872. Census is the only source of primary data at village, town and ward level. It provides valuable information for planning and formulation of policies for Central and State Governments and is widely used by National and International agencies, scholars, business people, industrialists and many more. Census is also the basis for reviewing the country's progress in the past decade, Y -if' W.P.(S~)No.3444of2010 monitoring the on-going schemes and preparation of future planning. It is for all these reasons, the restrictions have been imposed by the Rules so that a person who is undertaking the exercise in census may not be disturbed prior to its completion, otherwise the work would be left half done or if it is further undertaken by incumbent, the incumbent perhaps would not be knowing about the actual work done by the previous appointee and by the time he gets the feed back the very purpose of a periodical work may frustrate. (10) In the present cases, the Departmental Authorities have completely ignored the provisions of Rule 8 (vi) of the Rules 1990 and have also ignored the contents of circular dated 5 of June, 2010 which was issued by the Government for enforcement of the said Rule. Therefore, the impugned orders cannot be sustained and they have to be struck-off. (11) For the forgoing reasons, the petition is allowed. The impugned order, so far as it relates to the petitioner, is quashed. (12) No order as to the cost(s). Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge vatti