^-^ W THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC..G) WRIT PETITION N0. /2005 LfNDER ARTILCE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA • FETITIONER: -»•'*""' *'- ^ s^^ :< ^.^ ^- G. ^s*? / Kailash Mishra, s/o A. P. Mishra, aged about 52 years, occupation , service, Assistanf Engineer, Office of 'Executive Engineer, Indrawati Project Division, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) VERSUS 'v.- RESPONDENTSk l/. /,.^^f' 1>^%< ^^ ^^v°"\ ^\~^ ^IS^ '>T-^ 2. State of Chhattisgarh, through, Secretary, Departmenf of Water Resources, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) Deputy Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 3. Superintending Engineer, Indrawati Project Circle, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) 4./ Executive Engineer, / ~ ' ; . T. D. P. P., Water Resources Division, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) XI-HC-22 3^ '<<i<ii<n<i, siTfl^<i<s, fc|dlti^< 3TI^?I f^fl lii*<wi shHrei. .L/v •*******(**trf*-<./t^<)*«V^ 200 Rd^, SD^T^T ^Nisn^r sh^lsh Ri(lfg!T /• ^ W^sil g'MIIWgfStT Mr. Alok Bakshi, counsel f( Mr. Bhaskar Pvasi, Panel L By this writ petition unde] |ndia the petitioner has questidn| lated 5.4.2005 (Aiinexure P-1) wl the of5ce of Superiiitendiiig Eri fagdalpur to SUyain Bamai Proje| The case of fhe petitioner Livisiou siiice 1997 and looktns l^ the petitioner, he ha^ been ?esources Sub Division, Soleaiel that in fhe vear 2001 a NIT' was Division, Jagdalpur and the mblished in fhe NIT. Howevel anofher estiiaated cost of the wot. the earlier estiinated cost, whi( itarted Diakuig coiiiplaints agairj; >asis of tliat complamts the petf )ff place Aiabikapur. Leanied couiisel for tlie p^l iaughter is studying in Engi(3 petitioner is a low paid em.plo'st Anibikapur, which is a far off •|:|] Ini<iTfi<11-l iiHdTffteAtfsRZK ^sri^irsn^T ^ fhe petitioner. twver for tiie'^tate. Ai-dcle 226 of the Constitution of •d ftie legality & propriety of order icrebv he has been transferTed froia guieer, Indrawati Project Division, ;t Division, Aiabikapur. 3 fhat he was workiiig iii Jagdalpur [o the efficiency aad performauGe of siven additional charge of Water a. Rurther case of tlie petitioner is Qoated bv ttie Water Resoiirces Sub itioiated cost of work was also -, later on the petitioner prepared ;, wbich was less bv Rs. 10 Lac ttien •h iafuriated fhe contractors, fliey st tiie present petitioner aiid on tlie tioner has 'been transferred to a far ationer subiaits ffaat fhe pellti.oner's ;ering CoUege at Jagdalpur, tne ;e aad he Iias been traasfen-ed to .ace. Coirnsel further submits tiiat fhe petitioner inay be aUowed to make a representation to ^4$^ XI-HC-22 'ssf •<<i<iici4i, ®Tflu'i6,Ridiy^< 3ii^i ^iaqi *IIIMI s»)*ii<o"""""""""""••••?p^ 200 f^fea^ sn^T^iT ^i^an^T St>*<i<t>Hf?tT II) ^. 3n^T6«iiWBf?(T No.4 and respondent No.4 be petitioner and if the caiicellatiou adjust fhe petitioiier at the ap] fhe respondents has no objectio^ Haviag heard leanied coi; fb.e record, the lunited request just aad fair, as the petitione| daughter is also studying there.l raake a representation along wi) No.4 withia 10 davs froru tod directed to decide tlie representj of one inonth froni the date d: considering all grievances ar( accordaiice wifh law. It is directed fhat fhe p^ representation is decided, if alreji With. the direction aforesali Consequently, M.W.P. N( staiid disoosed of. Certified copy as per rule^ •niitc'i'fl-f iiitiTffteiA<.Rl+Al< V' ^ 3TRriT3IT^T flirected to consider the case of of trajisfer order is not possible fhen |iropriate plgfe, to which counsel for jectio^i. [n.sel for the parties, haviag perused ^nade by couiisel for ftie petitioner is •ition£(r is workiag at Jagdalpur and his fherefore, the petitioner is allowed to [~h copy of this petition to respondent |ay aad in tura respondeut No.4 is ^tioii of fhe petitioner wifhia a period receipt of the reprcsentation after d difficulties of the petitioner in jtitioner shafl not be relieved tffl the ifalrefadv not reUeved. id, this petition. staiids disposed of. ). 1337/05 & I.A, Nos.3310/05 also Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo (<fl^y^)