IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) w.P.No.?>371/ 2006 WGIE BEMSH Petitioner : ,ASrikant Kumar Mishra /"/’,V/S/0 Shri Antaryami Mishra, Aged about I (f Central Railway, Bilaspur (C.G.) . Versus Respondents Union of lndia — Through the Secretary, Railway Board, Ministry of Railways. Railway Bhavan, New Delhi. 2) ,, Member Siaff, Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, Railway Bhavan, New Delhi. 3) The Director General Railway Protection Force, Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, Railway Bhavan, New Delhi. 4) The Director Establishments, Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, Railway Bhavan, New Delhi. 5 .Shri 'Anil Sharma, DIG-cum—CSC, /Western Railway, Churc Gate, Mumbai. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA h XI-HC-78 .o‘o.o¢.o~ 3%: 211mm, Wang,W wt) n1“. g9. M) o.oo¢ooo W 200 WW (W) mamm WWW wwwm 17.12066 Hear-d Shri P. Diwakar, Sr Advocafe for The pefi‘rioner. Shri Ami‘r Choudhary, 3mm advance copy. By The insfan? pe'ri‘rion The Securify Officer, Sou'fh Easf Cen" “the Transfer order" dufed 11.7291 been Transferred from Bilaspur ar Railway Profecfion Force Academy, The grounds of The chaiien years, whereas, The pe+if&ener - compleTion of 3 years, The pe' accommoda'i'e responder}? No.4, pracficing as Denfisf in fhe BilaspL at Biiaspur. . mmffwm aw%w2m%¥r pe‘rifioner, who is working as Chief 'rai Raiiway, Biiaspur, has chalienged )6 (Annexure P—4) whereby he has id posfed as Principal, Jagjivan Ram Lucknow. ge are That fhe normai Tenure is 4 has been fransferred jusf differ ii'fioner has been fransferred To fhe pe‘ri‘rioner's wife has sfarfed r and his son is si'udying in Ciass 9% r Learned 5r. Advoca'fe for 1'} 1e pe'i'i'i‘ioner submi-Hed iha'i' iooking To The exceilenT and ouTsTandin . Advoca'fe wifh Shri PR. Pa'rankar, Qing Counsel for fhe respondenfs on service record of The peTiTioner, even The General Mahager, Railw y, Bilaspur vide Annexure ?-7 has recommended for cancellaTion of h s Transfer order and moreover, The person who has been Transfer d in place of The peTiTione; has obTained sTay from The Bombay igh CourT by filing a wriT peTiTion P.T.O. agains? his Transfer, Therefore, :‘mmedia‘rely no person is coming in piace of fhe pe+§fisnen He fur'rh‘er' submits Thcrr The pe‘rifioner has aiready made a represenfa‘rion (; mésing'a“ his grievances, as such, in accordance wifh law and in the: s’myed, To which learned Smnding objecfed. l for The par‘i'ies and having regard fa ‘ihe fads and circumsfances f ‘i'he case, wifhsuf expressing any opinion on The meri‘rs of The ca e, respondeni' No.2 is direcfed f0 consider The represenfafion of i e peiii‘ioner in accordance wifh iaw > and decide fhe same within a pe od of 30 days from Today. As no coming immediaTely, Therefore, Till , The peTiTioner may be allowed To confinue on The posi, if he is alrea y nof relieved. Wifh the direcfion aforesq Having heard iearned couns person in place of 'l'he peTi‘l‘ioner: 'ihe decision on 'ihe represen'i'a‘l'i The peTiTion sTands disposed of. Consequen'i'ly, M.(W.)P. No.2 00/06 also wands disposed of. Cerfified copy as per rules. l Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge P.T.O. Annexure P—6) ‘l'o responden‘l' No2 he be direcfed 1'0 decide 'l'he same mean'i'ime, fhe impugned order be i Counsel for ihe Railways has no? i o i , XI-HC—78 ww,m,%mg{ Wm. 0.0.0. ‘OOOO"00‘ ~... HE 200 (42 mwm mW<W> WWEWW wmm mmwm .Ai‘. éa‘Wm