® 6) f •zs-o 7 /-• Single Bench IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.PJS1 N0. S^0& / 2009 Petitioner Respondents Versus :1 ^..••: .,l:.'"<' <"..•'' ^^y' "s"1'' £?*' t&A^ iy "_..'••'' €^^y^ ^:^- 2. 3. Shiv Prasad Gurjar S/o Rajman Gurjar, Aged about 48 years, Working as Headn-iaster Priraary School, Masanki (Odgi), Block - Odgi, Tahsil - Surajpur, Distt. Surguja-fC.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Dist : Raipur- (C.G.) The District Education Officer, Surajpur, Dist: Surguja-fC.G.) The District Education Officer, Ramanujganj, Dist: Surguja-(C.G-) WRIT PETITION U/A 226 QF TIIE C_QNSTITUTION OF INDIA J?artic.ularsjcif_th&i?£titLoner^ 'SSI ^fWW^, »fl1+l<IS, fsidK-iy ;......y^..-...cs..)......^.s5 SB : HON'BLB SHRI JVSFT^ I'yn'UlKBR DlWAKBg" 28.07.2009 Shri A.N.Pandey, counse Shri Yashwant Singh Th^kw. Dy. A.Q. for the State. Challenge in the pres 30.06.2009 (Annexure P/l) pai the petitioner who is working from Primary School, Masanki ^nt petition is to the order dated [sed by the respondent No.2 by which |as Headmaster has been transferred pdgi, district Surajpur to the option of District Education Officer, Ram^nujganj. Contention of counsel fc^ the petitioner is that the respondent No.2 being a District Educatio(i Officer of Surajpur has no right to transfer the petitioner from his contends that in his present pl. on 4.9.2008 and thus in less being maintained district wise transferred. Contention of counsel f< make a representation to the would be decided in accordancd Counsel for the petitio4 However he subniits that til] petitioner inay be given some pt Accordingly, the petition| pefitioner to make a represent^ decided by the authorities conj ^prfwih 'wi^f •?f^S <fa<^i< ^ for the petitioner. distrfct to another district. He further ice of posting the petitioner has joined .han ten months he has been shifted again. Lastly he contends tha|: the seniority of the Headmaster is ^nd therefore the petitioner cannot be ir the State is that let the petitioner respondent No.l 8s 2 and the same with law. er agrees to make a representation. his representation ts decided, the otective order. is disposed of with a direction to fhe tion within a period of ten days fr'om the date of receipt of fhe co^y of this order, the same would be emed within a period of three weeks from the date of its receipt. Till| then the impugned order shall not fee given effecf to. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge