SfWiE BEWCH ^, c^ l^ THE HON»BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.fS) No. of 2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^0.^:: ^^^ •'..^' ...••'\1^ ^°"1^' ...-"" Nc ^: Naval Das Sahu, S/o Shri Gokul Ram Sahu, aged about 44 years, working as Upper Division Teacher (Tribal Welfare Department) at Govt. Middle School Nedgaon, Block Manpur, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS :1) State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Development Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), 2) Collector, Rajnandgaon Distt. - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3) Assistant Comniissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4) Principal, Government Middle School, Nedgaon, Block - Manpur, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA < o -7 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER WRIT PETITION (S) No. 4857 of2011 Naval Das Sahu. RESPONDENTS VERSU8 State ofChhattisgarh & Others. Anut WRIT PETITION UNDER .^RTICLE 2260F THE CONSl'ITUnON OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble SIm Satisfa K. Agnihotii. J. Present: Shri H.B.Agt'awal, Senior Advocate with Shri Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Adyocatc for the pctitioner. Stiri Ainn Sao, GoveiTiment Advocate fortfie State/respondents QRDERCORAL) (Passed on 25th day ofAugust, 2011) 1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P/l), whereby the petitioner working Upper Division Teacher at Middle School, Nedgaon, Block Manpur, has been transferred to Middle School, Aundhi, Block Manpur, on administrative grounds. 2. Shri AgrawaL leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that under the transfer policy dated 13.06.2011, it is clearly stated that the Collector alone is competent to transfer the employees belonging to class III and IV ser^rices on proposal made by the departments in approval ofthe minister-in-charge. 3. ln the case on hand, it appears that the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Wclfare, Rajnandgaon, without following the guidelines issued in the transfer policy. has passed the impugned order, when the Collector has been assigned the responsibility of transfer of the employees working in the concemed district, on proposal of the concerned departments. Thus, this sufters Irom fhe defect of competence of the officer. Accordingly, the transfer is unsustainable intheeyes oflaw. 4. As a result the transfer order dated 15.07.2011 (Aimexure P/l) in respect of the petitioner is quashed. However, liberty is reser^ed to the govemment to pass appropriate order, if so advised, in accordance with law, in administrative exlgency and in public interest. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the above extent. Sd/- SatishK.Agmhotn Judge