WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Present: SB: Ean’ble Sln'i Satish K. Agnihotri. J. Shri Ashok K. Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy G9vemment Advocate for the State/ respondems. h) ORDER ORAL (Passed on 06t ciay of October, 2009) By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order dated 11th September, 2009 (Annexure P/l), passed by the Government of Chhattisgarh, School Education Department, iii a representation dated 7m August, 2909, inade by the petitioner, and the order dated 29m June, 2009 (Annexure P/2) whereby the petitioner, as Lecturer, was transferred from Government High School Bhagwanpur, District Surguja to Government Higher Secondary School, Vijay Nagar, EducationDistrict Ramanujganj, Ambikapur. z:x The petitioner had earlier challenged the legality and validity of the impugied order dated 29th June, 2009 (Annexure P/2) in W.R(S) No. 3580 of2009. The learned Single Judge, after considering all the aspects of the matter, dismissed the petition at the in tion stage itself on 20th July, 2009. Thereagainst, a Writ Appeal being No. 238 of 2009, was preferred by the petitioner. At the time of admission, the petitioner RES?ONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & Others. Q7?)e9 \iolafl HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPI IR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 5713 of2009 PETITIONER : Krishna Kumar Sahu. VERSUS sought permission ofthe learned Division Bench to withdraw the appeal with iibexty to file a representation. It was ordered accordingly. It was further observed thai if a representation is filed, the same should be considered Within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. The representation of the petitioner was finally rejected vide order dated 11”“ September, 2009 (Amexure M). The question involved in the present petition is asto whether the impugned order which was challenged in the earlier petition i.e. W.P.(S) No. 3580 of 2009, has attained finality. The order passed by the learned Single Judge in earlier Writ Petition No. 3580 of 2009 has neither been modified nor has been set aside by the learned Division Bench and as such, the order passed by the learned Singie Judge in W.P.(S) No. 3580 of 2009 has become finai. Even otherwise, it was not possible for the Govermnent~authorities to take a contrary View when judicial order was. in existence. The learned Division Bench has not considered the matter on merit in appeal as the same was withdrawn by the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner is estopped from challenging the same order which had . already been the subject matter of the writ petition and the same has been dismissed'by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 3580 of 2009. kn. Thus, for the reasons stated hereinabove, the writ petition is dismissed as not inaintainable.