v ,,-.<»: HIQHGOURl'OReNHi^TIISG&IW^^^B^^ ^[MVIStl^?BENei+'':;.':'"::;';r CQR^^'^:.tTON^E«H|ffi^l|aS.»EEM^P^^J.&:J''^ ^;-.;KHQN®LE^^F6M^NAfltei^ ADDellant Petitioner WritApBeal^lo.4t9^( 2WW SX Gupta, sfo. late K^es^^ Pi^aa^^agedabouftl^years, tA>.;Raiipurtyistrii^SuTgt.ija^(©.@y) •wiRsys.'.,:.IN, ::.;.-,.,' . Reslrondents 1. StateW ^ShMatti^ Seci^i^S "®baP^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^ - ^l ^mmts^r^ ©hhattls^Fh,Raipyr,0istFiet^R|if)Ui;, ::.?<GKG^.|':^':.:-'';^::'.^:,'-^ 3. As^^r^ ©oinrirntsSoner, ; Tr^ ^^^^^^^^ ^ 4; ^(anBgl.^lNi^s^N^ ^ ;-''^^..-©)|ieie|,a%3«)iBg!iaa^%-^?|3S^ V^rafnagar,^^^ Wi J DeatiUncBBFSeGlmiR2^it»l:ail^l!®tinaWisamflii!(iftl^^ •'"•fciaivii^iiaBSEiaiiMBliNS^aanniR^^ •^i^s§ij£^iS^%a?^£gS Present: ShrlP.KyVgr!|i^|tiJ||iSi^gn^lsv^^hrtMarre)j Parar^gcQun^ll^tMliap^al^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ ShnJA.1.0HaniS|aaoeltl..a^w respon<tecitsN0.1,?23ind3.; . r .•-•:7:-.,lBuaQMSNT'*:::'. :<i3t!'^Gimi|ifittoy ;ipi&».y^3s^ia£^sa:^^4^i^^^^^ pi^^' i"^^-"..,,^,,,,,;,' ,i-'T';':;:;-'";'^<'':"3il^ a !j-,ii^.,j;:::-|.^^=:! s- The fbllowing juclgrrienf of tfte Cburt was (M^»d by RajeevGupta,CJ. Leamed coynsel fbr the partiesare heanj on admfssion. 2) Appellant S.K. Cupfea, has filed this writ appeal against Wie impigned order dated 29.10.20t0, passed in W.P.S. N0.6334/2010. 3) The appellanV petjtiorier filed the writ petjtton for the fottowing reliefe: "1) That, tMs Hon^le CiHirttT^ » to issue a wnt^its, ^er/o^leG^ cllrectionAtirections quashing the jmpugir^K trar^r oird^^ 22.10.^10 (Annex.^ Govemmentand^t0.20$0^nex.P^,passedby AssistantCommissjoneF,*I'rit>al^Weifare,Jashpurand petitiorrern^ |^ly^a'tN^itoc^"u®^ ^ Executlve Oflicer, 3affipa<t Panchayat, Bsgicha, DistnctJashpur(C.©.) 2) That, thjs Hon'ble Coyrt may kindly tie pleased to ceril forttie entire rec^rds frem^ffi^ the respondents in respeet of the transfer of the petitioner. 3) That, this HQn'blg Court may kindly bepleasal to grartf ar^ other relief^, Whi^ is (teemed^^W properintheaforesalctfectsandgCireuBistencesofthe "case."-:\ . ' : '• ^ ' : . ', 1';. : ,• 4) The petitioner, thys in substoce, was challenging tNe order of his transfer frem C^iefr^ E Panchayat, BE^kstia, Distrjct^ashpuF. ^ 5) Leamed Singte ^udB®on a thoroi^h considerafion of the pleadingsandsubmlssionlsofthepartiesdidroitfirolEU^mfirmit^ in the order of the petitioner's transfer and there&lre dismissed the writ petitton vide jmpugned orderdated 29:10.2010. 6) Shri R.K. Werma, leamedSeniorGounselvrithShrtManpj Parar^t leamed counsel for the appettantvehementtyargued that ^heleamed Slr^te Judgehaserred innotglvir^cto tothest&missionsadvaroedontiehaiyoftheappellartthatt^ 1 appellant's transter suffere from mafe (%fe. 7) During theGOurse of hearing leamed Senlor Counsel <or the appellant was poffltedlyaslseclabout^the pleadlng in r^artfto malaMe'wi the writ prfiti0 Leamed Seraor Cou^ could point out onlyground No.7 in^^p^ition^atingtotheaverrnent of /r^ tiW. The grour^ N&7 of ^ reads as follows: "7. That, the impugned transfer order has^^^^b^ passed wnth malafide intentlon anctjustto oblige e polittt^iyiRfluentialpereonsarKljys^toiK»ommodate therespondentno.4." 8) A bare perucsal of the above qyoted ground Np.7 mErtces it apparent that the pleading inTegaretto e allegedmafe flcfe is too vague. 9) On the above vague pleading, the appellant's order of transfer cannotbeheldMbesufN1n@fromfflTym^affi:fe. 10) For the foT^cMr^ res^ns, V tlp mrt^ fi^ eithe^in the order ofai^lant^transferorl^ew^ ^^ ...••'<& :?' sf' ^ ^ •SaSassa, li 1 ll. ,:.. J/ ^%sy^ subbu.* pas^d by the leamed Stngle Judge declining to interfere in the orderofappellant'stransfer. 11) The mfra Court appeal, theretore, fails and is heretsy dismissedsummarily. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- ^•N. Chandrakar Judge ! :: .11; l.i- I :• .^.-—