^' /* 3^?- <^^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. AT- BILASPUR WRIT PETITION ^S) N0. OF_2QQ6 A/,• .•"'.'0'' PETITIONER J<, iSe-^-'' .-• _y^"/ ^7!.-^-^'"..-" ^ ^y^-" ^^" ^y' i"<^^""' RESPONDENTS 'J w ^^ ^^ KULDEEPKUJUR,' AGED - 46 YEARS, SON OFLATE N. KUJUR POSTEDAS - U. D. T. AT - AADIM JATI KALYAN MIDDLE SCHOOL, HARRADAND, BLOCK - KUNKURI,DISTT. - JASHPUR R/0 KUNKURI, DISTT. - JASHPUR,C.G, VERSUS 1. 2. 3. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH/ THROUGH - THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHEDULE TRIBE & SCHUDULE CASTE DEVELOPMENT, D. K. S. BHAWAN, RAIPUR THE COMMISSIONER) DEPARTMENT OF SCHEDULE TRIBE & SCHUDULE CASTE DEVELOPMENT, CHHATTISGARH, H. Q. - PT. R. S. U.CAMPUS, RAIPUR THE COLLECTOR,t DISTRICT - JASHPUR (C. G.) Writ Petition Under Article - 226 & 227 of Constitution of India for issuance ofwrit in the nature of mandamus or suitable direction or directions, order or orders etc. XI-HC-78 3?g'^irai?pr, {Sifl+i'is, Rioi'My WTFITaww .wp....y.y^ /.«.£...^ 3Ti^?Ttra^7 (^fg^r) an^r^f^; wv ^gTWHfgcTsn^T 21-8-2006 ooilasel PaAel petitpon Mr. R.K. Kesharwaxu, Miss Deepali Pandey, on advance copy. Heard bofh the counseL By the instant Writ Constitution oflndia, the petiti^ dated 7-7-2006 passed by trausferred fiom Middle SchooIJ Jashpur to Middte School, Alorij Main gnevaace ofthe showing as Assistant Teachcr, and fhe second gTound is secldng the approval ofthe In the circumstances, subnuts that the petitioner may| to resptondent No. 1 and respoi saine to which learaed counsell has no objection. Haviag heaid leamed fhe facts and ciroumstances of opinion on the meritsofthe cas^ for the petitioner is just, pctitioner is aUowed to make a gnevaaces, nnncxing a copy respondent No. 1 withiu 10 days resbondent ch|i|I<-l41-f ITTfMfffiWl'f.falWK, ^sri^tiTsn^T for the petitioner, Lawycr for tfae State/respondeats, peqtion tfafct Minlst vsdeT Articlcs 226 & 227 of the ^ner has questioncd tus traasfer order No.3, whereby he has been Harradaad, Block: KiMikuri, District Block: Mauora, Districfc Jashpor. [tioner is that hc has been transferred |chereas hc is Upper DMsion Teachcr hc has been transferred without tster coaceraed. pcamcd coiinsel fi>r fhe petitioner bc aUowed to mafae a representation kdent No.l be directcd to decide the |appcaring for the State/respondents coitasel for the parties, having regard to |thc case and without e?cpressiag any ;, the prayer madc by tearacd couasel and rcasonablc. Thereforc, thc ^letailed rcprcsentatfon raisiag aU his wnt petition and its annexures tb fl-om today and in tura, respondent P.T.O. failr ofltus XI-HC-78 3^ -MI'Mld'M, yrfltf'16, fsldiyy *11*1MI SSHI'sh ^ M^rqirR-fi'b 3{\^\ 4^* (V^^) Soma \- ^ /.^ ?^TWCTf?g'3n^T a- No. 1 is-directed to decide the period of 30 days irom the d^ objections raised t>y the pe^ accordaace with ]aw. Wifh fhe directfon Cousequently, M.(W.)P,N< Parties are entitled for r^prcsentation offhe petitionerwithin a of its receipt, afiter considering the itioner in an objective maaner, in aforesdud cettificd ^rafeifrT wcicff ^'te^t ^RCT!: ^) 3T1^PT SH^T d, fhe petition slaads disposed of. 3427/2006 also stands disposed of copy ofthisorder.^^- ^a° ^^ P.T.O.