IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (S) No. S3f& OF 2011. PETITIONER ^ "..••; ^yy ^•"""" ^ N^^e- ^cS^ T. R. Patel, S/o. late Shri N. L. Patel, aged about 61 years, Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary School Urba, District Raigarh (C. G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1.^'State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) 2. <A.ssistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 3. Principal, Govt. Higher Secondary School Urba, District Raigarh (C. G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2260F THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA "<s;tt,iass3>S; ~5^f -*\WW^, W^tWSS, ^vfRfy w.^.Cf^,^^ Z^1 3ii^r''pRT(^<i^) S'1^1 'SiT S<{-li+ 'tTSff 31T^T s»i*i TOiiwntoisii^r SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan 27-06-2011 Shri Somkant Verma, counsel fi Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Law advance copy. Heard. petitiorjer thereafter Learned counsel for the petitior) an order of transfer dated 15-07-2010,1 which was finally disposed off vide or<|l 1) directing respondents to consider V^ directed that till the representation authority, the transfer order dated 15-|( petitioner, was kept in abeyance. On this Court, the transfer order remainecf order was cancelled by the State 2010 (Annexure P-5). Even allowed to Join, which led to filing allowedvide orderdated 24-01-2011 that the petitioner joins the place of one week from the date of receipt of th|s which !ed to fi!ing of contempt petitiorj be issued on 24-02-2011 to the Thereafter, on 01-03-2011 (Annexure| directed the Principal to allow the petit) the salary of the petitioner for the 11(1 2010 to March, 2011 has not been paitjl vkjas +i^f<'t41-< mtfl'iife'et <r<«<;K ~ST 3{tg*t sii^i hriyastava, J, r the petitioner. er for the State/respondents on submits that being aggrieved by |the petitioner had filed writ petition, |er dated03-09-2010 (Annexure P- \e representation, and it was further disposed off by the concerned P7-2010, so far as it relates to the (he strength of the order passed by in effective and finally the transfer Gctvernment vide order dated 14-10- the petitioner was not being another writ petition, which was lirecting respondent No.2 to ensure rtiosting forthwith, within a period of ' th|e order. The said order was flouted, in which, notices were directed to cfbncerned Assistant Commissioner. |P-10), the Assistant Commissioner (oner to join. It is now submitted that iititervening period from September, m^pr,^ -FS/140—2/20:1--1.50,000. r~ ^e? •<iwwt<, w\ww, WKffT WHtqi aii^r 'RCT' (iyF^<i<^r) Sifel W Si-Uf . WIT *tl^ sh*iiq> \ TODW ^lfta 3I!^I z Considering the aforesaid doct petitioner has been redressed, the re necessary ordere regarding arrears of his representation, which is admissible It is unfortunate that the petitior and again arising out of the dispute p^ No.2 shall consider the claim of the p| within a period of three months from t| order. With the aforesaid direction, the| eM<iI<!i<il*T fVt^ ^f 1^1 <f<it$r< ^'3tf^q3n^I iment, by which, grievance of the spondent No.2 ts directed to pass isalary of the pelitioner pursuant to to hlm under the rules. er has to approach this Court time irsuant to transfer. The respondent stitioner in Just and proper manner ie date of receipt of a copy of this petitlon is finally disposed off. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge i