^ B& IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTCSeARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) Writ Petition (S) No. i1%<iS of 2011 PETmCQNER VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1>^'' s^^-^g w /^' / 2. 3. 4. Motiram Patel, aged about 53 years, S/o Late Shri Hemnarayan Patet, posted as Headmaster, Janpad Primary School, Thakurpali, Block-Dabhra, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.6.) State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Schoot Education Department, b.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) The Cotlector, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) District Education Officer, Janjgir, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Block Education Officer, babhra, District-Janjgir-Champa {C.G.) .<<^' / <</ WRIT PETITEON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INblA ^&-^^ ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTI8GARH AT BILA8PUR PETITIONER WRIT PETITION (S) No. 4885 of2011 Motiram Patel. RESPONDENT8 VERSUS State ofCKhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETtTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri. J. Present: Shri H.S.Patel, Advocate for the petitioner. Shii Shashaiilc Thakur, Panel La^erforthe State/respondents. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on 25tn day ofAugiist, 2011) 1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P/l) whereby, the petitioner, working as Head Master at Jan pad Primary School, Thakuq?ali, Dabhra, has been transfen'ed to Umiayan Primary School, Gobrabhata, showing it to be on his own request. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that fhere was no application on the part ofthe petitioner to ti'anster him from one place to another place. Thus, the impugned order to transfer the petitioner on the gi'ound ofbeing on his own request, is bad in law and does not come withinthe purview ofadministrative exigency. 3. Shri Thakur, leamed Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/ respondents submits that ifb it is so, appropriate shall be passed keeping in view the above infmiiities in the impugned order. Till then, the impugned order dated 15.07.2011 (^^miexure P/l) in respect ofthe petitioner shall not be given effect to. 4. In view of the above. according to leamed counsel for the petitioner, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed ofwith the afbrestated observation. Sd/- Sarish K. Agnihotri Judge