r C )C 3 gD L ‘ I 1 BEFORE THE HON BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C G) (3) No 1% mag; i PETIIT‘IONER Shyam Lol Rowm‘ aged about 45 years son of Loie Sanfosh Kumor Rowot, working as Training Officér (Elecfricidn) lnd€Jstriol Training Ins’riiu’re, Raigarh R/o ITI Colony, Chakradhar Nagar Rargarh Disif Rargarh (CG) VERSUS i. S’ra’re of Chhai’risgarh Through — the Secre’rary Departmeni of Technical Educa’rion Dau Kalyan Slngh Bhawan Raipur (C G) i PrInCIpai ‘, Indusirlai‘ Training ' Insiiiuie, Raigarh, Disi‘r. Rai'garh (C.G.) WRIT PETITIONrU/A L226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA > HIGH scum OF cHHATTlgrsam-i AT l aILA§PUR j ‘ ‘ I NGLE BENCH : HON’BLE MR. SATISH K AGNIHDTRI, J. 1 ' WRIT PETITIQN 4s.) No.18 caF 20c? l , i § i the Industriai Training institute, Raigarh, was transferred by order dated 29-6-2006 (Annexure P-t) to the industrial Training Institute. Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon. The petitioner must have ccmplied withLthis order passed in June, 2006. The petitioner has flied this, petition on 22-1 2—2006‘impugning the order dated 29-6-2006 (Annexure P-1): if the petitioner has not compiied with the order dated 29-6-2006 (Ann’exure P-t), the conduct may-ecome Within the purview of disobedience. 2. This Court cannot permit perpetuation of iiiegaiity committed by the petitioner, if any: The transfer order is not punitive in : ll Petitioner I : Shyam Lai Rawat ! versus Respiondents ‘ t : State of Chhattisgarh and another Presént : Mr. Roop Naik, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Sushi! Dubey, Government Advocate for the Statefrespondents. ORDER ' (Passed onr15‘ Day of January, 200?) The petitioner, working as Training Omcer (Electrician) in naidre and is an' incidence of the service. ThEs Court, in exerciae of its jufigdiction under Articie 226k ef the Con titution of India, cannot enieirtain the same. Even otherwise, the petitioner has not raised any greqnd. i.e., maiice; non—competence of the fflcer passing the transfer weer, or violation of any ruies or reguiation o 'seek indulgence of this - i i Court. ‘ i Looking from at! angies; the petition is devoid of merit. Thds‘, the petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. i - r , i 3.? sh K. Agnihotri