CQWV IN Tm HIGH coURT 0? JtiDICA'IURE AT BILASPUMC ’ TTESGARH) WRIT mTxTIoN NerL‘w/j OF 2003 &.C.Jaiswal, son of Ayoéhya Prasad Jaiswal, aged about 60y§ars. Occupaticn—Assistant Engwzeer , postea at Rural Engineering services at sub-Divisibn.Janjgir—champa,(c,a.) PETITIONER < ERSUS :1. §tate of C'nhattisgarh,through. the Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department,Raipur, District-eRaipur,(C.G. RESPO NDENTS : 2o Sub Divisionaloofficer, V , Rural Engineering servioes, .Champamistric‘t o-Janjgir-eChampa, Leas. ) K WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 y¢§ITHE CONSTETUTION OF INDIA. ) mamwmt Constitution of India, the petiti aner challenges the transfer order dated 25f06i‘2003 passed by respond€nt no. 1 (Annexure P/ 1) by which the petitioner has bee n transferred from Sub—Division Janjgir Champa to Sub-Divisien Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh. The caSe of the petitioner is that he is working as an Engineering Service at Janjgir Champa and he will be retiring in the manth of Janualy, 2004 and at the fag end of his career, tEle petitioner has been transferred . frem Janjgir Champa to Dhar Counsel for the petitione submits that the pension case of the petitioner has already been inn up before the authority and the services of the peu'tioner hardly remains only four months and if E the petitioner will he transferre , his pension case will be effected and he will face irreparable 10s . Assistallt Engineer in the Ru 'aigarh, District Raigarh. Em“ g 3’ K KI-EC——78 Ea Wm, Wm, W. < \ OI 20! 66% W 2QQ ma BF:W am 341%?1 Ema; F mam W (Wm mmm awé'st W?W t‘fwm $ W 3m -~ 18 109 I2003 <5 Shri Awadh Tlipathi, counisel for the petitionEr. I Shri Ranbir Singh, GA for the State. E By this writ. petition under Artick 226/ 227 of the XIvHC—7 8 mm (‘ugfiaim ' WWW ’7; counsel for the parties and having Having heard lealned regard to the facts and cirééumsmnces of the case and having ibur months are left 1'11 his retirement and as per the rules, pension case to be processed before six months from the date of rethlement of the petitioner, more—over as i e Wamaaw WNW § W v“.i N—m“E ‘ W i mmum%fwm $3imm regard to the. fact that only / per the Government Policy normally a Government employee is not transferred when only two years are left for his retirement, I am of the opinion that it is a flt case in which the petition of the petitioner should be allowed If the impugned transfer order is allowed to exist then petitione r’s pension case will not be processed even after his retirement, more over even if the impugned transfer four months am. left in retirement of petitioner, as such for this small period petitioner services cannot be utih'zed for full extent. l order is implemented, since J i . In the result, this petition is allowed and his transfer order i V / Sdl- L.C.BHAD00 Judge wwywww.m,m“ mnwwa rmestwmwnmwnommwMWlWm dated 25]06]2003 (Annexur .P/ 1) is quashed. M WV / amt.n