a^- .) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.ISl N0. ^^ Ilc? /2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^' '^*'' ^ ^ ..Is" ^" Ram Sai Ram, S/o late Shri Pataram, aged about 45 years, resident of village Gursa, Post Sanga, Tahsil and P.S. Sitapur, Dist. Surguja (C.G.) VERSUS l." State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretaiy, Department of School Education, D.K.S. Bhavan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) 2. •' The Collector, Surguja, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja- (C.G.) 3. •r"District Education Officer Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja-(C.G.) 4. -—"BlockEducation Officer, Sitapur, Dist. Surguja (C.G.) 5. Sardar Ram Kindo, Head Master, Primary School, Dhekidoli, Block Sitapur, Dist. Surguja, Ambikapur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR^ISSUANCE ^F A ^WRIT IN THE NATURE OF IVIANDAMUS. PROHIBITION. CERTIORARI ETC. OR ANY Q2LHER DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER ^^^ .•••''. ^>^y'' ^.'y^ .»* . \- .-•"f> HIGH COURT OF CHj-lATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRITPETiJION (S) N0. 4940 QF 2011 PETiTiONER Ram Sai Ram Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattlsgarh & Others iWrit Petition under Article 226 of the Consiituiion or india) Single Bench : Hon'bie ahri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. PresenS:- Shri Sunil Otwani, Advocate fbr fhe petitioner. Shri V.V.S.Murthy, Dy. Advocate Genera! '#ith Shri Shashank Thakur, Pane! Lawyer for the State. r^i ?~^ i?"^i 7"?t P^ /^a*».?*fci .n 3 \ ORU£R('ORAL) (Passed on thls 26 dayor August, 2011) 1. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that the pefitioner has not made an applicatlon for mutuai transfer from Prirnary School Sur, Biock Sitapur to the Priiriafy Schooi Dhekidoli, Block Sitapur with Sardar Ram, but the petitioner has moved an aDOlication for his mutuai transfer v/ith Raghubar Ram of Primarv' Schoo! Gersa. The impugned transfer ordsr dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P-1) indicates the transfer on mutuai basis, which is contrary to the appiication, as is evident from the airidavit dated ^ e~s f^iQ f^!f~t^i -< ^ja.UB.^iJ'l'i. 2. Shri ?>f1uiihv, iearned Dy. Advocate Generai with S'nri Thakur, learned Panei La'A'yer appearing for the State respondents submits that it appears that there is a mistake; thus, the State may be permitted to pass a fresh order having regard to the facts of the cass, IT so advissd. in the meantime, the transfer order dated 15.07.2011, shal not be given sffect to, in respect of the petitioner, oii proper order is passea. 3. In view of foregolng, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothina survives for adjudication in the matter at this stage. 4. Accordingly, the wrlt petition stands disposed of. F:—:" Sd/- i SATISH K.ANGNfflOM Judge ^ ssnoK