SINGLEI! IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.fS) N0. ^^^9^/2011 PETITIONER J. ^ Duleshwar Prasad Sahu S/o. Shri B P Sahu Aged about 37 years working as Dy. Director, Indrawati Tiger Reserve, Bijapur, Dist: Bastar- ^'^ (CG) ^•^w^ VERSUS RESPONDENTS n , ^^> f>€/^ X^F^^' ^ ,^ : 1,. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Department of Forest, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG). ,/• 2. Additional Secretary, Department of Forest, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG). / 3. Phuljons Toppo currently working Assistant at the Circle Office, Surguja Crcle Ambikapur Dist: Surguja (CG). t WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^^- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETmONER WRTT PETmON (8) No. 6992 of2011 Duleshwar Prasad Sahu. RESPONDENTS VER8US State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRTT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri P.S.Koshy, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Amn Sao, Govermnent Advocate for the State. ORDER (Passed on 25m day ofNovember, 2011) 1. By way ofthis petition, fhe petitioner seeks quashing offhe order dated 14.11.2011 (Annexure P/l) whereby the respondent No. 3 has been posted in place of the petitioner, without Iransferring the petitioner jfrom his present place. 2. Shri Koshy, leamed counsel appearmg for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working as Deputy Director in Indrawati Tiger Reserve, Bijapur, District Bijapur. The respondent No. 3, who is posted at Ambikapur Circle Qffice, Surguja, has been transferred and posted as Incharge, Deputy Director, Indrawati Tiger Reserve, Bijapur, vide order dated 14.11.2011 (Annexure P/l). The petitioner is already posted there. Shri Koshy further submits that there is no order m respect ofthe petitioner, thus, iffhe impugned order is being given effect to; the petitioner will have to hand over the charge to the respondent No. 3 and tihie petitioner will have no place for his posting as there is only one post ofDeputy Director. Further; ifthe petitioner is relieved from his present place ofposting and is not given any new ^ 1-^;- ^r place for joining, then his salary will not be releasedcausmg great hardships to the petitioner. 3. Qn pemsal of the impugned order, it appears that tiie petitioner apprehends that he would be dispossessed from his present place of posting on account oftrmisfer offhe respondent No. 3. Ifthere is only one post of Deputy Director at Bijapur, it is the concem of fhe respondent No. 3 asto how he will be posted when the petitioner is ah-eady working at that place. The petitioner has furfher not filed any document in regard to his contention that he has to hand over his charge to the person who is traiisferred at his present place ofposting: It appears that without there being any cause of action in his favour, fhe petitioner has mshed to this Court for quashing ofthe transfer of Ifae respondent No. 3, which is, in no mamier concem ofthe petitioner. 4. If it is fhe situation that only one post of Deputy Director is available m Lidrawati Tiger Reser^e, Bijapur, then it is for the State Govemment to ensure tihiat the respondent No. 3 as well as fhe petitioner, both are posted at places where fhere is clear vaGancy and no one is relieved witfaout giving them proper place ofposting. Iffhere is no order transferring fhe petitioner from his present place ofposting, despite tfae order passed in favour of the respondent No. 3, the petitioner may not leave his place ofposting for waiit ofproper legal order. 5. In view oftfae above, the writ petition is disposed of Sd/- SatishK.AgnihoW Judge Ashok.