/ ” IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Wn't Petition (s1 No. MfHP> /2011 PETITIONER Smt. Filomina Toppo, aged about 49 years, W/o' Gosnath Toppo, Asstt. 3"“ ‘M.f;v/\ Teacher, Prm1ary School Tolma, Block y\ M‘W. ..... , Lanunga, .1 Dlstt. ‘ . Rmgarn . . (L.G.) a were“ \ g\ $6“ VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of School Education, D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur. Collector, Raigarh (cc) District Education 0&ccr, Distict Raigarh (c.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE226OF1HECQNSIIILQ§QN ' > * QF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT. ‘ ‘ 9% HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 4713 of2011 PETITIONER : Smt. Filomina Toppo. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Ravindra Agawal, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Government Advocate for the State. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 18 day of August, 201 1) 1. I:eamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the {W petitioner was promoted Eom the post of Assistant Teacher to the post of Head Mistress Vide order dated 27.06.2011 (Annexure P/2) and posted at Government Primary School, Mudapara. Thereafter, vide the impugned order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P/l), the petitioner has been transferred to Gharghoda on the option of Block Education OEicer. Shri Agrawal further submits that the said order is defective as the petitioner has been shown as Assistant Teacher, and her place of posting has also erroneously been shown as Tolma, Lailunga, whereas the petitioner is posted at Mudapara. 2. Shri Sao, learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that if there is any clerical mistake in the impugned transfer order, as aforestated, the same shall be corrected and a fresh order shall be passed. He further submits that till then, the impugied order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P/l) shall not be given eEect to. 3. In view of the above, according to leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives for adjudication. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the aforestated observation. Sd/— SATISH K. ANGN'IHORI Judge