^T) IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTESGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETETION (S)NO. ^6^^~ /2011 PETITIONER Murli Ram Thakur S/o. Late Kishun Lal Thakur, (Head Master) aged about ; 55 years, R/o. Village : Jagannathpur, Tahsil : Balod, District: Durg (C.6.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS .^€^ ^•yy ^'^' -.--•" State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District: Raipur (C.6.). State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, distnct: Raipur (C.6.). District Education Officer, burg, District: Durg (C.6.). The Collector, Durg, District : Durg (C.6.). Block Education Officer, Balod, District I > : Durg (C.6.). WRIT PETETCON UNDER ARTICLE 226 / 227 OF THE CONSTETUTEON OF INDIA . 3. 4. 5. "<%.s !SB?&8 S '^ COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR V/RIT PETI'nON CS) No. 4677 of2011 RESPON'DENTS VERSU8 State ofCMiattisgarh & Others. %rRIT PETITION TO-CT5ER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTrfUTION OF INDIA 4. ??bl Shri P.K.Patel, Advocate for the petitioner. Slm P.K.Bhaduri, Paael Lav»yerfor the State/respondents. (Passed on 16 day ofAugust, 2011) Cfaalienge m this petition is to flie order dated 15.07.2011 (Armexure P/l), wfaereby fhe petitioner •w.'orkin.g as Head Master, at Priniaiy School Ghumka, has beea transfen'ed to Primary School Sundaia, Balod, District Durg, oa administrative grouiids. Shri Patel, leamed counse) appearmg fbr the petitioner subinits that the transler policy dated 13.06.2011 elearly states that the Collector aloue is competent to transfer the employees belongmg to class III aiid class IV sen.'ices on proposal made by the departments in the approval oftiie minister-in-charge. In the case on hand, it appeafs that the District Education Qfiicer without following the guidelines issued iu 1fae transfer policy, had passed the impugned order, when the Co3!ector has been assigned tfae respoasibility of transfer of the employees working in the eoncemed district, on proposal of the concemed departmeats. Thus. this suftere Irom the defect of competeace of the officer. Accordingly, the traiister is uusustainable ia the eyes oflaw. As a result., the transfer order dated 15.07.2011 (Ardiexure P./l) iii respect ofthe petitioner is quashed. However, liberty is reserved to fhe govemment to pass appropriate order, if so advised, in a.ccordaace with law, in admimstfative exigency and ic public 5. Accordiagly, the writ petition is allowed to the above extent. Sd/- SATISH K. ANGNIHOM Judge