^ .1 ''• \0 6 L- 8^ SW^- ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.l WRIT PETITON (S) NO.M%C)^ /2011, PETITIONER: ^^ ^..^y^ ^%($*-<?-s..:-<' s^^^ ^..- ^,^,^ui>^ <^ Ram Kumar Dubey^S/o Late Shri Rajaram Dubey, aged about 52 years, Presently working as Agriculture Development Officer Jai Nagar, Block Surajpur, District Surguja (C.G.) ^-^ RESPONDENTS:- ^^w: Versus 1) State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary Department of Agriculture, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan - Raipur (C.G.) 2) Director, Agriculture, State of Chhattisgarh Raipur (C.G.) 3) Collector, Surguja at Ambikapur (C.G.) ^r} The Deputy Director, Agriculture Ambikapur, Surguja (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ^- PET1TIQNER. RESPONDENTS HIGH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETiTION (S) N0. 4896 OF 2011 RamKumar Dubey @. RX.Dubey Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Singie Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Manoj Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Govemment Advocate for the State. ORDERrORAU (Passed on this 26tn day of August, 2011) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks to chailenge the iegality and validity of the order dated 15.07.201 1 (Annexure P-1), passed by the respondent No.3, whereby, the petltioner working as Agricuiture Deveiopment Officer, has been transferred from Block Surajpur to Block Kusmi, District Surguja. 2, Learned counsel appearing for the petitsoner submits that the petitioner is duly elected District President of Chhattisgarh Agriculture Graduate Government Agricuiture Officers Union, Ambikapur, and, as such, the petltioner is protected from transfer for a period offhree years as per the circuiar dated 24.06.1998 and 25.08.2004. 3. Shri Sao, iearned Government Advocate submits that on verification, If it is found that the petitloner is duiy elected President, the order may be cancelied and in the meantime, the impugned transfer order dated 15.07.201T, in respect of the petitioner, may not be given etect to, till appropriate decislon is taken. 4. itisaccordjnglyordered. 5. in view 6f foregoing, iearned counsel for thepetitioner submits that nothing survives for adjudlcation in the matter at this stage. S. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dlsposed of. .^w*'»"i ludse s^^ 71 ashok