; '"^ n i"r: •'T'. '•• 9S& ^ E^, ^'"J '..^ " YX°^^.r^T •^'^Y^-'-'- .^—v^S'^--""1 daw*-" @ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITION N0.52-c OF 2005 PETITIONER: SCE^ ^tVED-COPY (b ^ ^.».°.'u*m ^ Bhimsen Soni, S/o Late Shri Shambhu Prasad Soni, aged about 48 years, presently posted as Lab Technician, Samudayik Swasthya Kendra, Manendragarh, Distt - Koriya (Chhattisgarh). Versus RESPONDENTS ijl^ // .'>, ^ < ^. ? .'•^ •>..'';.. // .. .^''' ^^. ' ['/r '"^. //f -^ f ^\ • ^i V. »\) ' " .-. A 'K.-'S.. -.-;'''• .'/ 'v^ ;'c^:...*~"^>*..-.. - - :"^ -^/' ^. '.y^- '"'""^ /- "' .,."'•' ^c,u'^y State of Chhattisgrh, Through Secretary, Department of Health, Mantralaya, D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) Director, Health Service, Raipur Collector Distt Koriya (CG) Chief Medical and Health Officer, Koriya (Baikunthpur), Distt Koriya(CG) WRIT PETITIQN UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION^F INDIA 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER. As shown in the cause title. 2. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENT. As shown in the cause title. -<^^—^f^"a feffHK(;^^g!j|^g,^ ?J HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BiLASPUR SjNGLE BENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AONIHOTRI. J. WRST PETITION NO.S267 OF 2005 Bhimsen Soni versus State of Chhattisaarh and another Preseni : Mr. B.D.Guru,counseiforthepetitioner. Ms. Deepa!" Pandey, Panei Lawysr for the State/respondents. ORDER (Passed on 27ln Day of February, 2007) The petjtioner white working as Lab Technician in Samudayik Swasihya Kendra, Manendragarh, District Koriya has been transferred to Samudayik Swasthya Kendra, Tengani, Baikunthpur, vide ordsr dated 13-09-2005 (P-1). The petitioner impugns t'ne transfer order datsd 13-09.2005 (P-1). 2. This Court, vide interim order dated 27-10-2£X)5, directed that the status quo, as was existing on that day, in relation to the fransfer and posting of the petjtioner, shall be maintalned by the parties, 3. VVith the passage of time, the wrft petition has become Infructuous, to which ieamed counsei appearing for the State/respondents has no Gbjection. 4. Thus, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. _..—- Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge