c^ 2^7 L^—\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (S) No. ?%°°> OF 2011. Singte Bench PETITIONER A' ^^r \>^>:..- ^0;^^^' J:^^ ^y ^y RESPONDENTS ^ Rohini Prasad Chaturvedi, S/o. Shri Lalmani Chaturvedi, , aged about 55 years, R/o- Village- Janakpur, Near Sarswati Sishu Mandir, Distt. Koriya (C.G.) VER S U S ^ : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary Department ofForest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2. Conservator ofForest, Forest Circle-Sarguja, Disst. Sarguja (C.G.) 3. Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division- Manendragarh., Distt. Koriya (C.G.) 4. Shailesh Tiwari, S/o- (Not Known to the petitioner) Posted as Forester at Depot Ambikapur, Distt. Sarguja (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petitioner named above begs to submit as under:- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0.3803 OF 2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Rohini Prasadl Chaturvedi Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocat®for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State. Amit Present:- ORDER (ORAD (Passed on this 18th day of July, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge tihe legality and validity of the order dated 21-4-2011 (Annexure - P/1). 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, working as Range Assistant, is posted at Range, Chanti Kunwarpur, Forest DJvision Manendragarh. In the meanttme, by the impugned order dated 21-4-2011 (Annexure - P/1), one Shailesh Tiwari has been posted in place of the petitioner, without transferring the petitioner from his present place and, as such, it is not possible for two persons to work together at one place on one post. By raising all of his grievances the petitioner submitted a representation on 3-7-2011 (Annexure - P/4), which is pending consideratjon. 4. Be that as it may. without going into the merite of the c^e, the respondent State authorities are ctirected to look into the grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law and on its own merlts, as eariy as posstble, preferably within a period of three weeks. It is made clear that till the case of the petitioner is considered, status quo, in respect of placement of the petitioner, as obtaining today, shall be maintained. 5. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sdl- .. ,_, SatishK. Agnihotn Judge