@ $=$I6§v§ €QURT OF CHHAmséARH AT BILASPUR Wrif hafi‘iion No. 4106 af 2506 ?€1'i+imer D. Senapa‘ri, w/o V. Sanapafi, 46 Wa, ANM af Kosmi PHC, Chum Block, Gariyaband, Dis‘H'. Raipur (CL—1) Versus Regpmdanfs 1. 5km cvf Chhm'fisgarh, Through 5ecremr‘y‘ HeaH‘h & Family Welfare Depft, D.K.5. Bhawan, Raipur, CE. 2. 5min Rekm Masih ANA/1 PHC SifHjw, Devbhag Bkjck Rqipur‘, CG WRI? PE‘HTEON UMDER ARTI€LE 22$ GF THE €ON$TETL¥TEGN GF INDIA. 5mgie 52mm Hw‘b!e Ma". Jusfha Smish K. Agiiihawi. Presanf: Mr. Rqja 5harma, Advocafe far We pefifianar‘. Mrs. Argu AhuJa, Depufy Gaver‘nmenf Advocate far 1‘ha Sm‘re/respamianf§ Na. 1. 0 R D E R‘ (Paww aw 1é’“ Day af ApFiI, 2097) The pefifécner has fikzd ‘rhis pemian chaiienging fhe frunsfer’ arder dafed v 18.7.2906. By virfug 0f fhe inferim order‘ dafad 10.8.2006, passed by ‘i‘his Court The pefifianer‘ is confinuing m‘ fh‘z ariginal piece m‘ pasfing. Z. Ba fha‘r as if may, wé‘rh fhe passage of fEme fhis pafi‘rion has becama i'nfrucfuous as perm! 9f fransfer is na’r appiimble farever. A? fhis pefnf ef fime fhem is m quzsfkm fa examim fha vaiidify of The framfer arder’. However, i‘ha Pasgwndenfs are a1“ Iiber‘h; fa pass appmpriafe arder‘s keeping in View fhe publit: inferesf (md admiriEfrafive exigency, wéfhauf insisfing on campiiarxce af The impugmd Transfer ordar‘. 3.7 In View a‘f “the abevel This pe‘mian sfaricis dispwed of. Na ardar as To casfs. w Sd/— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Thakur