("F^00 IN THE HON'BLE fflGH COURT OF JUDICATURE. CHHATTISGARH At BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. _^S^_ / 2006 PETITIONER / ..<•. ^€C.-- ^^K-^"" ^ •^'''.^ \ Versus (.. - RESPONDENTS : / 1. J- /^y 6" ^'e^'i^ ^^s& . T?AKURVyAYSINGH TSi 2°t;., j wsnh"C'!I*rt'^«lPUS-B"asl!tlt (c-<") ^° (A^ / /3, Govind Bhatore S/o Late Shri. D.N.Bhatore, Aged about 39 Years, Assistant Draftsman.(Mech.), H.E.M. Division, Water Resources Department, Raipur, Residing at: 27/56, New Shanti Nagar, RAEPUR-492001 (CG). ' Union of India Through: The Secretary, Ministry ofPersonnel, Public Grievarices, and Pension, Pension & Pensioners' Department, 310, Loknayak Bhawan, NEWDELHI-110003. State of Chhattisgarh Through: The Secretaiy, Water Resources Department, D.K.S.Bhawan, Mantralaya, RA.EPUR-492001 CCG) State ofMadhya Pradesh Through: The ChiefSecretary, Water Resources Department, Vallabh Bhawan, BHOPAL(MP) The ChiefSecretary, State Re-Organisatioh Cell, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, BHOPAL (MP) The Chief Secretary, Water Resources Department, Vallabh Bhawan, Mantralaya, BHOPAL(MP). if Shri. Mewalal Tandan S/o Shri. Vikram Das Tandan, Aged about 43 years, Assistant Draughtsman, Rural Mechanical Services, Water Resources Department, BILASPUR- 495001 (CG). /" WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 / 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR THE ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE ORDER AND DIRECTIONS W THE NATURE OF CERTIORARY, MANDAMUS ETC. ,i HI6H COURT CT JUOICATURE CHHATT[56ARH:8ILA_SPLWt Single Bench; Hon'ble Shri Sotish K. Agnihotri, J. W. P.S. No. 5056 of 2006 Petitioner : fiovind Bhotore Versus Respondents : Union of India & o-Hiers 5hri B. P. Rao, Advocxste for the petitionei". 5hri Rajneesh Shrivastaya, Advocate on the authority of Shri Shailendra Dubey, Standing counsel for the respondent No.l. Smt. ^nju Ahuja, Deputy 6ovt. Advocate for -t+ie respondent No. 2. None for the other respondents. Oft DER (18*h September. 2006) 1. The petitioner, by way of this petition, filed under Art'icle 226/227 of the Consti+ution, seeks a direc'tion to the req^ondents No. 1 and 2 to consider his cose aton9 with re^}ondent No.6 for mutual transfer. 2. On query as to whether the petitioner- has any ri9ht or wdiether there is any provision of law or circular or executive instructions, which provide for mutual tpansfer, and whelher the said right is enforceable by this Court or not. The petitioner has no-t+iing to submit except that there is one circular which is in the nature of guidefjnes for consideration of case of employeea requesting for mutual transfer. 3. It \s well settled principle of taw that in absence of a right whjch is enforceable by Court of law, extra ordinary Jurisdiction of this Court cannot be inyoked. Even otherwte, looking from any angle, 1+iere ss no merit in 'Hie case. 4. The petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. Thakur Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge