sw mmwgéw /®é//" E HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 3696 Of 2006 Ja1 Karan Smgh S/o Shn Bansh Raj V , aga¢ab0ut 34 years ”Ass1stant Teacher, ‘ i Prunary School Dugupara Block Ramanuj Nagar Dlstnct Surguja (Amblkapur) CG} R/ o Vlllage Sara1 Para Post Ramanuj Nagar Dxstnct Surguja (CG), PETITIONER VERSUS f 1 The $tate of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary SC/S Development Department ’ Mantralaya, D.K.S.' Bhawan, Raiptir (CGy‘ ‘ 2 Asslstant Comrmssmner Tr1ba1 Development Ambtkapur Dlstrlct ‘Surguja (CG) ION UNDER ARTICLE 226/ 227 OF THE QONSTITUTION OF NDIA M IN TH RESPONDENTS T WRIT PETIT 3am, m:W . 3N QIQQJX 3&gia‘i 200 5 CW Smt. Indira Tripathi. counsei o Smt. Ahju Ahuja, Deputy G vt. Advocate for the State/respondenis on advance ccpy. Heard. r the petitioner. By the instant petition. the p titioner has challenged the order dated 7‘” July 2006 whereby the v itioner has been transferred from Government Middle $chobl. Ja tpur. Block Ramanujnagar. District Surguja to Pithora. This order has been passed by the Additional Secretary to the Government of Ch ttisgarh, Department of SCIST. The main grievance of th petitioner is that the petitioner was already transferred vide order daed 30‘“ June 2006 by the Assistant Commissioner, Tribai Developme Ambikapur from Jagatpur to Primary School Dugupara. Block Ramanujn gar, District Surguia and in pursuance of the said transfer order, the peti ioner had already joined on 12‘" July 2006, therefore, the petitioner oug' t not to have been transferred being Assistant Teacher out of the district Learned counsel for the pe ’ 'oner submitted that white. making the impugned order, the Additional S ary was not aware that the petitioner - was already transferred from Jag pur. therefore. the transfer order has wrongly been made. as such the petitioner may be allowed to make a‘ representation bringing this anoma to the notiée of respondent No.1 and he be directed to decide the respondents has no objection. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the ca: on thermerit of the case, the pra‘ ame, to which learned counsel for .e and without expressing any opinion yer made by learned counsel for the P.T.O. t n . . e t . mm(u§m§m mmm WW§WW WWW - w w w m &;an%w3n%sT ’ 7.8.2005;- HW,W¢,W . , WW(W) XI—HC—78 H1 200 EEWWW ” o z . . . mmffww aswm petitioner is just, fair and reasonable. THerefore, iHe p§lfioner Is allowea to make a detailed representation a ng with a copy of this petition to the respondent No.’1 raising ail his grievances within a period of 1O days from today and in turn, respondent No.1 petitioner within a period of 30 d representation, after considering all accordance with law.’ ln the meanwhile, the effect a respect of the petitioner shall remai petitioner is decided. With the direction aforesaid, ti Consequently, M.(W.)P. No.3i Parties are entitled for certifiec i Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge ‘ Barve v I shall decide the representation of the ays from the date of receipt of the the points raised by the petitioner, in nd operation of the impugned order in 1 stayed, till the representation of the r ie petition stands disposed of. )51/2006 also stands disposed of. i copy of this orders i i P.T.O. l