1 i§ ‘G ‘ KA 1N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, AT- BILASPUR 1C.G.[ w. P. No. 48 i8 OF 2004 t VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH — THE SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT MANTRALAYA D.K.S. BHAWAN, RAIPUR SMT. J. RANGARI, PRINCIPAL, GOVT‘ HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, TUMADIBOD, DISTT. — RAJNANDGAON , I WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE— 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS PROHIBITION SUITABLE DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS, ORDER OR ORDERS .‘ g °' /B.D.BERWANSH1 AGED : 50 YEARS 6w SON OF SHRI LADU RAM BERWANSHI POSTED As v OFFICIATING DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, AT— RAJNANDGAON R/O— RAJNANDGAON (C.G.) /, 33-:? Wan—«m, “W; r g, fm W mkl'PN§,€gl&L§% 20$ Wmw (WEE?) WWW WW§§$1WK $Wem$r WW$fm Em wry? away 'i 710112095 Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, c unsel forthe petitioner. Shri AkhH Agrawal, Panel La erforthe State, Heard. By the instant petition, the p titioner has challenged the order of transfer vide Annexure—P/‘l by which th1 petitioner has been transferred from W. Rajnandgaon, where he was poste as in charge, District Education Ofhcex to Chhuikhadan of District Rajhand aon as Principal, Government Higher Secondary School (Boys). Learned c unsel for the petitioner submits that initially he was posted to present place of posting vide order dated 07/08/2004 as Annexure P-S and only after 40 day the above order has been passed which is without any complaint or any admi istrative exigency. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as pq’r direction of this Court passed vide order ~ dated 29.00.2004 of Annexure—P/8, he had submitted his representation to the respondent which was decided by order dated 09H 2/2004 of Annexure—P!2, wherein it was mentioned that previ usly the State Government has passed the V order by mistake andtherefore trans erring the petitioner by order of transfer was amended and the representation oft e petitioner was rejected. i have heard teamed counsel for the petitioner. i have gone through the de ision of the State Government, which is at Ahhexure P-2, on the representation of the petitioner. The petitioner is a lecturer, however, he was made ln charge, District Education Ofncer vide order dated 07/08/2004 of Annexure P—3 and by which the petitioner was transferred temporarily and accordingiy the a ove irregularity was rectified by the order dated 16/09i204 of Annexure P—i ai .d the petitioner has been transferred to his present place of posting at Chhuikh dan, District Rajnandgaon on the ground of administrative exigency and same annot be amended and transfer him from service and after going through the Iacts and circumstances ofthe case, i am of 12/2000 50,000. r ‘ wmg? kl;..€.;§bio,.. fa'amgr 3m imam, mm; mlg .9 ’1 ‘ “W 2G9 the opinion that the $ame cannot b the petitioner deserves to be dismiss in View of this order, MW stands disposed of. e chaiienged by the empioyee. Accordingly, ed and it is dismissed. P. No. 5093/2004 and LA. No. 9577/2004 i i Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge era? terse (We) mid as“: @n‘ie‘ i 3a? aeréei amid: El—n $3$Ef6€ Wdii / -L, simimhm d fee”;W e aim m .J