fft6c>^, © @ BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF CHHZ-iTTISGARH &T B1U\SFUB.^ W.P. No. t3<>^B /2 003. PETITIONER s Kuleshwer Patel^ aged about 40 years, s/o ^^^(^J.^'^i Posted as Patwari at Patwari Halka No. 17 (Dham3.ha), Durg^ r/o Sikola^Urla Basti, Durg,, P.0. & Distt. Durg, C.G. 1; V E R SU S RESPONDE^TS s 1 . 'State of Chhattlsgarh, through Secretary^ Revenuo ^ntralaye^ ^ D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, P.0. -•-^ .^^(•9^'^" & ^strict Raipur,~C.G. ^^•^^ ^: T(V9V±^^ •3%&><s (^^•;' :"::^?^*-"'" , l^ 2. Collector, Durg, C.G. 3e Shri Pitambar Belchendan^ P atwari Dhan-dha^ Tebsil Dhanx3ha, Distt. Durg^ C ^G, ^ £.STITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/22r0F THECONSTITUTJON OF J^D^A FOR ISSUANCE p®A_m_IT pF_C^TIORARI^ JMAKiDAMUS AND ANY OTHER iyDIRECTION/ORDER. =F~ XI-HC-22 ^TT^T^FT r^jcb sn^r 5^^icti <Mf^d V. ~5^f -^MM^f ^Tll^i^ facrtKiy _......^..3..ai..|.pj *N|ch ^l^ds ^b^icb 200 '^^t' ^T^r'^RiTW^rft^ 21-11-2003 Smt. AAeera Jdswal, counse) By thi^ petition filed under^ obl^i<rl^l4 'RPraf ^ fe^ <Fai^K ^fr^rf^^n^r for the petitioner. 5hri Ranbsr Singh, (?oyt* A(pvocate takes notice for respondsnts 1 and 2. Heard both the counseS Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, th©petitioner has cha|lenged the order dated 25-9-2003, Annexure-P/1 by which the pe-^itioner' has been tronsferred from Patwari Halka No. 17, bistrict bur^ to Navagarh, District bur9< The case of the petitionerl is that he is working as Patwari at Haika No. 17, Dhamdha, District petitioner has been transferred / Navagarh, District Durg in Rurg and by the impu9n@d order the m th^ mid s&ssion from Ghamdha to order to accommodate Pitambar Beichandan, The transfer of Piltimbar Belchandan, Patwari has been at the p©titioner/splace on of the petitioner are studying in a student of Ctass 10th, Renuka Krishna Patei is a student of cias hiis request. The sons and daughters [>urg city, Daughter RGnjcyia Patel is Dhamdha. The petitioner made that has not been considered, Patel is a student of class 6Tn and <th ^ 5Tn. Th©father of The petitioner is a diabetic patient and he is unc|@r the treatment of the doctor at ^ representation on 16-10-2003 but F- XI-HC-22 'STI^T'^T f^iwa^ $^^i<^ ^it^d Barve/ -4- 's':a?^izn^izT, ^^^<o, fa<v<i<i<i< 3n^r ^ra? ^PTFff^^"-•—---"•----"•^ 200 ^re^T* OT^?T ^wW <if^a -^ Leamed coun^el for th@ p@1^ the petitioner has been effec^ accommodate respondent No.3, ^d in the mid sessions just to [he children of the petitioner are studying at Durg city so this mid ^essions wiil create probbm for his chiidren, therefore, the petitionerj representation before respondent respondent 2 has no objection. Having heard the learned r^gard to th©facts and circumst^ allowed to make a detailed repres^ntation raising all his grievances to respondent No, 2 within a perio< respondent No. 2 will consider th| / and after considering a!l his grieva^ objective manner within a period 3 the representation. If the petitionsr has alreac then he may be allowed to continue Writ petition is disposed of Consequently, M.(W.)P. 10,095/2003 ©Isostand disposed o1 Parties are entitled for certi cbHid^il^ *<l^<nf "^ f^St <F3|^t< ^3<P^1 3Rff^T tioner ^ubmits that th@ transfer* of may be allowed to make a detdled 2 to which the learned counsei for ounsel for the parties and having nces of th@ ca^©/th@ petitioner i^ 15 days from today and in turn ^ representation of the petitioner |(ces shall pass reasoned order in an p days from the date of receipt of |/ not been relieved from the post ^ili the representation is decided. ^cordingly. fio. 3189/2003 and I.A. No. ied copy of this order, Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge