m THE mGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, AT-BILASPURfC.G.) WSITPETITIONNO. 4--I°i>7 OF 2004 BETWEEN PETITIONER y^'^ ^yy^- <^y <?* •^ LACHCHHIRAMDEWANGAN, ^ /AGED-47YEARS, A^ SONOFSHMSHYAMLALDEWANGAN POSTCD AS - ASSISTANT TEACHER, AT- GOVT. PRIMARY SCHOOL, GHATMADWA, BLOCK- KASDOL, DISTRICT - RAIPUR (C.G.) R/0 VILLAGE GIDHOURI, BLOCK- KASDOL, DISTRICT- RAIPUR (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 2. /../-" STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH- THE SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPT. MANTRALAY, D.K.S. BHAWAN, RAIPUR. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, AT-RAIPUR(C.G.) BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, AT- KASDOL, DISTT. - RAIPUR (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE- 226 <& 227 OF CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WMT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. PROHIBITION. SUITABLE DIRECTION OR DDtECTJONS. ORDER OR ORDERS v XI-HC—78 's^ .'^i<ii<n^,,®fl!<-i-'i<a,fsj(?ii'y^< ^^.USL^3..^........ sfR^iqn K;-(itt) ^^ SFH^T Sft+liq) sn^r Traq?;(ijcif^«i<^) 'reiiw ^ft(T3ni?i 14.01.2065:- Shri R.K.Kesarwanj leamgd Shri Akhil Agrawal,leame€lP Heard. By this instant petition the orderdafed 13.08.2004 OfAnnexui transferred from Govt. Primary £ School.Awrang. Learned Gounsel for the petif is alsoselected as theCoordinato has been flled as Annexure P/5 Education Officer, Kasdol has rec< but other teaGhers have also beeili ^ral<n<fll l-f^<nf ^f fe^ '<f^R^1< ^?3fRpT 31^1 : ^' lounsel for fte petjtioner. L.fortheState/respohdent. petitioner is challenging the transfer & P/1 by whicM the petitioner hasbeen chool, Ghatmadwa to Govt. Pnmary oner submits fhat apartfrom being the Assistant Teacher in the Govt. Prir(iary SchoolGhatmadwa; the petitiOner jn "Rajeev Ghandhi Shiksha Mission" andisdischargingthedutiesofCcfoFdinatorandinstructionstothjseffect and on the above ground ths Block mmended the cancellation 6T transfer orderofthepetiti6nervideletterof4nneXureP/4. On the other hand leamed ^ounsel for the respondent submits that from the pemsal ofthe transfer ord]er it is clear thatnot onlythe.petitioner transferred on administrative ground and the transfer isan incidence of ^ervice.itcan not bechallenged asthe Apex Court has'time and again he(dthattheGoUrtshouldnotihterferein the matters of transfer unless it is ^hown that is prohibited or B has been done malafidely; In this regard, 20p3 volume4SCC 3104is relied upon bythe State counsel. --L^-l.VI--1-^^^.-^-^•x,"L'-l-''l--v-L'1-V!I--L<L: 1 ^<,-L.-i-^-^''--L~^ T--UT-\ • "'l-'1^ '•-rL.-L.'W^\A^'^-^\/v ^aas <a ?wF'^IIAIIy)tl,.'Sifll'a*16,,[s«'ll*i'J><.' .^£..^3.13............... 3i^T'q3^('^3^?^ •sbisiffl^ &}T*mi* "^ I^TCl'^F^R ^'-sifiwsn^i ; ft'<; Considering the faicts arid ci opinion that Ihe instant -petitiort dismissedand it is accordingly dism hbs •<' Irsumstances of the case, 1 am of the no merits and it .deserves to be Issed. ! : f : Sd/- / Dhirendra Mishra 1 - Judge 0RPRJ—PS/350—12/2000—50.0QO. '^ v i y