^s. d^ . COURT OF CHHATTSSGARH AT Coram : HONSBLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & SUNIL SINHA, J. Writ Ap»eaiNo.192 of 2008 P.K.. Markandey, Aged 49 years, S/o Late Ram Prasad Markandey, Worklng as Accountant, At - O/o Assistant CommJssloneE-, Tn'bal Department, Durg; Dlstrict - Durg (C.G.) •VersBi.s • . 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary, Department of Schedule Caste and Scheduie Tribe Development, MantraSaya; D.K.S. Bhawan, Ralpur. 2. The Commissioner, Department of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Deveiopment, Chhattisgarh, H.Q. - Pt. Ravlshankar ShukSa Uniyersity Campus, Raipur. 3. Shri N.L. Kannauje, 4. Shri MirzaMasoodBeg 5. Shri Ram Kumar Sahu 6. Shri S.K. Shukia AJ! the Respondents No. 3 to 6 are working as Accountant at 0/0 the Asslstant Commissioner, Tribai Deveiopment, Durg (C;G.) Ursder - 2(1) ofthe Chhattisaarfi Hiah Court to Divlsion Act, Present: Shri R.K. .Kesharwani, iearned counsel for the a.ppeilant. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Government Advocate forthe State/Respondents No.1 & 2. d^) ith \'-- (1f"Septemb8r,2Q08) he foliowing Judament of the Court was passed by i, CJ.: Learned counsel for the partles are heard on admission. 2. Appeilant P.K. Markandey has filed this writ appeal against the impugned order dated 26-08-2008, passed in W.P.(S) N0.4652./2008. 3. Appejlant P.K. IViarkandey filed the writ petitlon for the foilowina reiiefs: "a. May klndly be pieased to caii for the entire records pertalning tothe impugned orders. b. IViay kindiy be pieased to jssue a writ in the nature of manda.rnus or suitabie direction quashing the impugned order, dt. 13/8/2008 Annexure P/1 and the impugned transfer order, dt. 30/6/2008 Annexure P/2 so tar as it relates to the petitjoner. c, Any other relief as the Hon'ble Court may be deemed and proper. d. Cost of petition may kindiy be pieased to aiiow in the of justice." 4. The appeiJant/petitioner thus, was seeking quashing of the impugned'order dated 13-08-2008 (Annexure P-1) whereby the appellant's representation against his transt'er was rejected and the order dated 30-06-2008 (Annexure P-2) whereby the.appeiiant was transferred from Durg to Gariyaband (Raipur). 5. Shri R,K. Keshawa.ni, iearned counse! for the appellant vehemently argued that the appsliant/petitjoner has been malafideiy @ transferred by the authorities with a vlew to accommodate respondents No.3 to 6. Learned counsei furt'ner submitted that the authoritles whiie rejecting the appellant's representation have not glven due welght to the grounds mentioned in the representation. 6. The aiiegations made by the appeiiant in the writ petltion about the malafsdes are too vague. 7. On due consideratlon of the submlsslons of the iearned counse! for the parties, we are of the opinion that the impugned order 26-08-2008 whereby the !earned Singie Judge. the appeiJant's writ petition does not suffer from any inflrsTiity whatsoever. 8. As we do not find any scope for interference in the appellant's transfer from Durg to Gariyaband (Raipur), ths writ appeai is liable to be dismlssed and is hereby dismlssed summa.riiy. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge ibbU