IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR. WRIT PETITION No. é 24.9 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/ 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA B.K.Pradhan, S/o. late Shri PETITIONER Pavitra Pradhan, aged about 50 /"’llyears, R/o. Basna, TahSil Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.) Vs. RESPONDENTS :1) State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretaiy School Education, Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, DKS Bhavan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) Director, Public Education Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.). 0? District Education Officer Mahasamund (C.G. : 4) Block Education Officer Basna, District Mahasarnund (C.G.) : 5) 'Satya Narayan Sharma Assistant Grade II Block Education Office, Basna District Mahasarnund C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226[227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT /WRITS, ORDER] ORDERS, DIRECTION/ DIRECTIONS etc. The petitioner most respectfully begs to submit as under :— 1. ‘PARTICULRS OF THE PETITIONER: As mentioned in the cause title. ? ) ( XI-HC—78 EW,W,W . wPé2éJ? WW Fa 2005 WWW WWW mwm mmafwm éswm WW(W) 5-7-2906 Mr. Vipin Singh, counsel for 1' Mr. AS. Kachhawaha, Govt A Miss sharmila Singhai, counse Heard. By The insmn‘r writ pefifion t of India, fhe pe‘rifionzr has ques‘Ho fhe order- da‘red 31-8—2005, whereb§ fhe posf of Accoun‘ram‘, Biock Edu‘ High School, Bhukel, and pursuanf ' Govt High School, Bhukel. There He pemioner'. Hvocafe for- fhe 5+a+e/respandenfs Nal fa I for respondem No.5. nder Arficle 226/227 of The Consfifufion ned iegaii‘ty, proprie'l'y and correc'rness of I The pe?ifioner- has been fransfer-r‘ed from :afion Officer, Basna, 1‘0 The Governmenf 'o Thu? order, fhe pefifioner has joined in is no budgef aiioimen‘i‘ for The pas? of Acccunfqm, Govt. High School, Bhu e3. When ‘i'his faci' was pointed ouf To fhe, Disiricf Educafion Officer, Mahasa und, he issued a iefier dafed 17—10—2005 wherein he admii'ied 'i'ha‘i ihere is k qtuwt k aiioimen‘i for ihe pas? 0f Accounfanf in Govt High School, Bukei, fherefore, The pe'ii‘i'ioner’s salary should be paid from the Office of Block Educmion Offiaer, Basna, fill furfher orders. In place of ihe pefi‘iioner, respondem’ No.5, who is Assis'ranf Grade—II, has been iransferred on his own request The fransfer of The pe‘riiioner is polifically moiivai'ed and mala fide. Reiur‘n has been filed on behalf of fhe Sfo‘ie/respondeni-s No.1 fo 4, in which if has been meniioned Thai fhere is The posT of AccounTonT in Govt. High School, Bhukei, buT The some was ,~_‘ vocanT since long, Therefore, There is no XI—HC-78 HW,W£,W Wm LO?4§L€>©L 11E 2005 WW(W) WWW WWW WW§1¥Q®ER éawm -2” mwm of Accoun+an+ and if is denied fha‘r 'Hne pefifioner has been fransferr'ed To :xccommcda‘re respondenf No.5. Having heard learned counsel for fhe par‘l'ies‘ I have perused fhe record. I+ is se‘r‘Hed, law fha‘r Transfer can be quesfioned on fhe ground of incompefence of The Transferring am‘horify or when fhe Transfer has been made on mala fide grounds, conTr ry To The sToTuTory rules. IT has been menTioned in The peTiTion ThoT The eTiTioner has been Transferred in order To accommodaTe respondenT No.5 and urTher The peTiTioner has been Transferred on mala fide grounds. In order To c allenge The Transfer on The ground of mala fide, The peTiTioner is required no only To allege The mala fides, buT has To esTablish The same. There is n Thing on record, which shows ThaT The peTiTioner has been Transferred n mala fide ground. Therefore, for This reason, I do noT find any subsTance n The poinT raised by The peTiTioner. Learned counsel for The pe iTioner argued ThaT The peTiTioner is noT geTTing salary since he joined on Th posT aT Bhukel. IT is evidenT from The IeTT r Annexure P—lO wriTTen by The DisTricT EducaTion Officer as well as The reT rn filed by The STaTe/respondenTs No.1 To 4 ThaT even Though There is posT o AccounTanT in GovT. High School, Bhukel, buT as The said posT was lying vac nT since long, There was no allocaTion of budgeT and accordingly, The DisT icT EducaTion Officer ordered ThaT The peTiTioner‘s salary may be paid fro Basna. IT is The inTernal arrangemenT of The respondenTs. When The peTiTio er was posTed To Ehukel, iT is The duTy of The DisTricT EducaTion Officer To e sure ThaT necessary budgeT is alloTTed and The peTiTioner is paid salary. ailoca-i'ion of budgef for fhe pas? XI—HC-78 WW, m, Ema: . H5 11mm amiab- a'vi 2005 Wm<W> mwm In fhe circumsfances, respondenf No.3 is direcied 1'0 ensure fha‘r all fhe salary oufsfanding be paid 1‘0 fhe pefii‘ioner wi‘i'hin 15 days from The dafe of l if for any reason if is no? possible 1'0 pay ;ponden1‘s should consider his transfer on a i. As has been menfioned fha'r fhe pas? of lg vacanf, if ‘l'here is no o‘lher impedimenf in a pos‘l of Accounfanf of Basna, fhen The 3f The pe‘iii’ioner +o 3asna, in case i'r is no‘l' fo fhe pei’i‘l‘ioner of Bhukel. WW§WW aawm _3- receipf of a copy of this order am fhe salary from Bhukel fhen fhe re. place where he could gef fhe saiar‘) Accounfanf af 3w is already iyiv Transferring fhe peh’fioner To Th1 respondem's may consider- pasfing 4 P>w>wm& yossibie To make paymenf of salary WH'h +he direcfions aforesai Parfies are enfified for car? cl, fhe pefifion sfonds disposed of. fied copy of fhis order. ”‘2’ 5d]- L.C.Bhad°0 Judge