IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P. (S) N0. 2 i'? a ^NGLE BENCH PETITIONER RESPONDENTS : ...'•^f ••'~.cW -^ig^ ^''.^"^c.y' /y^y •••'\^'\.-^ ^y>- ^.^•- Priyaranjm Sin^i S/o. Mangal Charan Sin^i, Aged about 46 years, R/o. Navapara, Ambikapur, Disttict Surguja(CG) VEBSUS 1] State ofChhattisgarh, Through: Secretaiy, Tribal WeUare Department, D.K..S. Bhawan, Raipur, DistnctRaipur(CG) 2] Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Departmeat, Raipur, DistrictRaipur(CG) 3] Collector, 8w@ija District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 4] Assistailt CoBUnissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Collector Campus, Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgaih) 5] Rambriksha Maravi, Incharge Block Education OfiSeer, Pratappur, District Surguja (CG) WRH' PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22</227 OF THE CONSTrTUTION OF INDIA ,.c°y ^T^e^ XI-HC-78 *11*<WI ShHTth TS? '^WMi<, W^\WW, (cfdl+fy< ,L:).^^.S^ W[ 200^ 3TI^?T14s|t*> (y)!^^) a'n^r^rf^TR? ^TSTT^T^W^ ?T3TW Bf?cT sn^T °til<lf<-l<)1-1 HIHW' ff fS^S <R|WI<, ^;3i1^irgn^r 19-7-2006 coutisel ttole Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Mr. Sumesh Bajaj, Govt) No. 1 to 4, on advance copy. Heard boffa the couascl. The main grievance of| petition undcr Article 226/22^ vide the impiigned order dated| respondent No.l, respondent post of In-chai^e Block Ed\ District Siuyija, where Thcrefore, the impugncd orde^ petitioner is ah-eady working, ofthe petitioaer, respondent ^ petitioner aad the petitione4 Bducation OfBcer vide oider i regular Block Education Officc^ In the circumstaaces, submits that fhe petitione^ representation to respondent ] anomalies to fhe notice of ri coiuiscl appearing for fhe objection. Having hcard teanied cc| to the facts aad circuinstaace^ any opinion on the inents of ti|ie for the pctitioaer. Advocate for the State/respondents the petitioner raised ia this writ of the Constitution of India is that 17-7-2006 (Annexure P-9) passed by INo.5 Iias be«n transferred on thc (.ication OfBcer, Btock; Pratappur, petitioner is already working. t" is bad m law because, when tbe if?ithout passnig any ordcr ia respect |o.5 has been posted ia place of the was posted as In-chai^c Btock 9-6-2006 (Annexure P-2) tiU fhe is appointed. [learaed counsd for the petitioner mav be aHowed to make a (<o. 1 ia order to briag out aU these jespondent No.l, to whfch learaed St^te/respondents No.l to 4 has no d^ted nnsel for the parties, having regard \ of the case and without tsxpressing case, the prayer made by teamed P.T.O. XI-HC-78 ^mora-iwqi 3sr •<)i<iiciti, ®iflti'i6,fstrtiy^ ..^;.^s^:<; 'Wi 200^ sn^r ira^ (4ci!jci^y) sn^r^irfeR; tTW 31^1 sbtijif] ;- ^ Soma ^ ^ffTEiKflfeTSn^T ^ ^rafepft^ miRff ff te<fl-rfSrRR ^sri^R'sn^r counsel for the petitioner is ju^t, fair aaad reasonable. Therefore, fhe petitk»neris allowed to me|ke a detafled representation atong with a copy ofthis petition to re^pondent No. 1 within 10 days Smm today aad jn tura, respondei^t No.l is directed to decide the represeatatioa ofthe petitioner date of its receipt, aflter consi<jlering all thc poluts raised by the petrtioner, ia accoidance with aud operatfon ofthe iiupugned |aw. In the mean time, fhe effect brder dated 7-7-2006 (Aimexure P- 9) is staycd, in respect of respojndent No.5, tiB the decisioa oa the petitioncr's representation. With the directions aforejsaid, tiie petitioa staads disposcd of. Consequeatty, M.(W.)P.Nc] also staad disposed of. Parties are eutifled for ce^tified coyy ofthis order. within a period of30 days j&oin the .2756/2006 aul I.A.No.6927/2006 Sd/- , L.C.Bhadoo Judge P.T.O.