(^ <~7 -'^<. tOK '.>'>»•-;* S¥Sii.^ lemeshwar Panigrahi S/o Shrl ?ant Prasad Panigrahi, aged about' , 35 years, Assistant Teacher,' Khand Shrot SamanvS^ak, Khand Shorl Karyaiaya,'''Block - Lohandiguda, ter (C.G.) Vs State of Chhattisflarh, throuah the Secretary, School Education leyaitiiietii, fijnlgtry D.KJ /f^n\ 2. 3. iawan, Kaipur tUuj Ji.la Panchayat Sanchalak, Rajiv Gandhi Shfksha Mlssion, Jagdaipur (CG) Jistrict Education Officer, District Jafldaipur (CG). ;€J^FB^ctloii ^SMi '^•^;; ^tE?a£&^^^<l^j?3 3 s'^^^i of fhe tisaarli ? D« Smt. Mala Dubey, iearned counse! for the appeilant. Shri Vinay Harit, learned Deputy Advocate Genera! fc res'oondents No.1 & 3/State. tav. The following judgment of the Court was passed by Learned counsel forthe parties are heard on admission. ^^ 2. -Appel'ant - t<0iemeshwar Panigarhi has filed this writ appeal against the order dated 27-03-2008, passed in W.P.(S) No.3996 of 2007. 3. The appe!lant,/petitionsr filed the writ petition chalienaing ths vaiidity of the order dated 1-6-2007 (Annexure P-2 in the "writ petition), passed by the District Project Commissloner, Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission, Jagdalpur,. District - Baster whereby the \ petitioner was repafriated to his parent dSpartment. 4. The appeilant/petitioner v/ho was worklng as Assistant Teacher jn Middle School, Chandanpur, Block Lohandiguda in the Schooi Education Department was sent on deputation to Rajeev Gandhi Primary Shiksha Mission vide order dated 10-12-2004. Thf order of the petitioner's deputation did not ^ prescribe any specific period of deputation. The petitioner was.repatriated to his parent department after having remained on deputation for a period of more than two years vjde order dated 01-06-2007 (Annexure P-2 in the Wrlt Petition). 5. The submissions advanced on behaif of the petitjoner did not find favour with the writ Court resuitina in dismissai of the writ petitlon vide impugned order dated 27-03-2008. S. On due consideration of the submissions of learned counss for the parties, we do not flnd any infirmity either in the order datec 01-06-2007, impugned in the v.'rit petitlon or the order dated 27-03-2008 passed by the learned Sinaie Judas dismissina the ^' appeliant's writ petition, which may warrant interference in this writ 7. The Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- SunilKumar Sinha Judge SU2&U