\s° ], THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHKTTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) W.P (S) No..tl.9.2.t4../2011 PETITIONER: Smt. Nigar Anjum Khan Aged about 46 years, W/o Shri Jaffar Hussain Khan R/o- Ward No. 17, Near Old Bus Stand, Khairagarh District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS: ^ Jl. ^•y ^..- K €y'J> /'^' G;' ^"J'-"7 ,^' ^^ State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) District Education Officer Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Block Education Officer Khairagarh, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Smt. Latika Singh Aged about 43 Years W/o .Not known to the petitioner, Presently posted as Head Master, Primary School, Gadadih, Khairagarh District- Rajnandgaon. PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE MANDAMUS AND CERTIORARI AND FOROTHER SUITABLi WRITS AND DIRECTIONS:- <^> -''^^^^w^usiiessf^ '^SSff^^S£^a£eSS^ ^sy^ -^/^. fflGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETmQNER RESPONDENTS •'A'RTT PETmON (S) No. 4424 of2011 Smt. Nigar Anjum Khan. VERSUS State ofCKhattisgarh & Others. Armt WRtT PETITtON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTI-njriON OF ENDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Asnihotri, J. Present: Ms. Meba Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed oa 27a' day ofAugust, 2011) 1. Challenge in tius petition is to the order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P/l), whereby the petitioner working as Head Master, at Primary Sehool, Primary School, Navin Pipariya, Khairagarh, has been transferred to Primary School, Gadadih, Khairagarh, showing it to be on mutual basis. '' 2. Ms. Kumar, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that under the transfer policy dated 13.06.2011, it is cleariy stated that the Collector alone is competent to transfer the employees belonging to class ffi and IV services on proposal made by the departments in approval of the minister-in-charge. It is furtfaei' submitted that the petitioner never made any request for her mutual transfer from the present place ofposting. 3. In the case on hand, it appears that th®District Education Officer, Rajnandaaon, without following the guidelines issued in the transfer policv, has passed the imougned order, when the Collector has been assigned the responsibility of transfer of the employees working in the concernsd district, on proposal of tfie concerned departments. Thus, this suffers from the defect of competence of the officer. Accordingly, the transfer is unsustainable in the eyes oflaw. 4. As a result, the tansfer order dated 15.07.2011 (Aanexure P/l) in respect of the petitioner is quashed. However, liberty is reserved to fhe govermnent to pass appropriate order, ifso advised, in accordance with law, in adinimstrative exigency and in public interest. 5. Accordingiy, the writ petition is ailowed to the above extent. SatishK.AgnihoOT Judge w