1E EHE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTI‘SGARH AT BILASP-UR wmAppea N06 528 12310» (ARISINGQUT 9F ORDER 993313427 / laxa9/2e09 PASSEH BY HON’BLE JUS’HCE SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI IN‘rW-FitS} N01.6<15 I f’2009 } B;L., Tandon SiorShri Baladram Tandem, aged abeuf 39: years, Rfa Villag€ Mmlidih, Police Station .Jaijaipur, District Janjgir‘Charnpa (Chhattisgarh) APPELLANT PETITIGNER Versus Stats ef Chhattisgarh Threugh : The Sacretary, Department of Tribal- Welfare D.K.S. Bhawaa, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Respend’ents, 2. The Upper Secretary Department’ of Tubal Weifare D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur {Chhattisgaxh} 3’. The Assistant Commissioner Department of Tribal Weifare Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa {Chhatti-sgarh) WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2(1) OF CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT A?PEAL TO DIViSiON BENCH ACT 2906’ IGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. l ‘ H CORAM: Writ Appeal No.28 of 2010. Appellant B.L. Tandon, S/o Shri Baladram Petitioner Tandon, aged about 39 years, Rio Village Muriidih, Police Station Jaijalpur, District Janjgir—Champa, (Chhattisgarh). > VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through; The Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan; Raipur (Chhattisgarh). 2 The Upper Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). 3 The Assistant Commissioner, Department of Tribal Welfare, Janjgi'r, District Janjgir-Champa, (Chhattisgarh). Respondents Writ Appeal under Section 2(1) of Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act,2oos. Present : Shri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, counsel for the appellant. Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Additional Advocate General for the State! respondents. JUDGMENT (02“ February, 2010) The following judgment of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Learned counsel for the parties are heard on l.A.No.01/2010, i an application for condonation of the delay in filing the writ appeal. @ i 2) On due consideration of the submissions of Iearned counsel for the parties and the grounds taken in the appiication, we are satisfled that the appellant has succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. 3) l.A.No.01!2010, therefore, is allowed and the delay. of 46 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 4) Learned counsel for the parties are heard on admission. 5) Appellant — B.L. Tandon has filed this writ appeal against the impugned order dated 27.1 0.2009, passed in W.P.S.No.61 51 /20G9. 6) The appellant/ petitioner in the writ petition was challenging the order dated 30.06.2009, whereby he was transferred to Middle School, Hamirgarh, Block Chhingarh‘ District Dantewada. 7) Learned Single Judge on a thorough consideration of the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, did not find any good ground for interference in the matter of petitioner's transfer to Dantewada and as such, the writ petition was dismissed vide impugned order dated 27.1 0.2009. 8) During the courSe of hearing, it transpired that the appellant has remained at his present place of posting in the district Janjgir—Champa for a period of more than two years. lt is not the appellant’s grievance that he is being frequently posted in the Naxalite affected districts. 9) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any innrmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, which may warrant interference in thiSrintra-Court appeal. @ 10) The writ appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is A). “V\ hereby dismissed summarily. i QR/1’ ‘ 3mm KUMAR smHA Chief Justice Judge ’ ”" (l 7 l Sd/- subbu