Q35 w’-/%\ ., 1N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.p. {Si No. ugh: [2009 S§mg§g g'Hmh / Rakesh Kumar Jain, aged about 54 years, S/o. Late Shri J.C. Jain, ..""..‘o Occupation P.T.I. (Sports Teacher), Naveen Boys Sports Center, Vadraf PETITIONER Nagar Surguja (C.G.). / VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1) State of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary Tribal Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan Rajpur District Raipur / (C.G.). 2) Assistant Commissioner, (Adiwasi Vikas), Ambikapur District Surguja (c.G.) /,, 3) Collector, (Adiwasi Vikas), Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) /-/’ 4) Block Education Officer, Vadraf Nagar, Surguja (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUW CFC INDIX" FOK' ’ ’ISS‘UKNCE OF ,uit‘ar APPROPRIATE‘ v ’ "_WRIT7WHTS, m— DIRECTION IDIRECTIONSefc‘. The petitioner most respectfully begs to submit as under :— 9/ . A WWM“?VC§?%L ..........W 200 ? WWW mamma- 31mm (Wm mm 311%?! EWW§f§éTm a? aifawm SB : HGN’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRETENKER DIWAKER 01.09.2009 Smt. Hamida Siddiqui, counsel for the petitioner. Shn' Yashwant Singh Thakur, Dy. AG for the State. Chailenge in the present petiiion is to the order dLated 12.3.2009 (Annexare P/ 1) passe‘g by the respondent No.4 anci the order dateci 30.6.2009 (Annexure P] 2) passed by the respondent No.2. By order ciated 12.3.2009, the petitioner has been relieved on account of the transfer order dated 30.6.2009 a11d vide onier dated 30.6.2039 the petitioner has been transferred from Govt. Higher Seconc'iary School Latori, .Block Surajpur to the option of Block Education Officer, Wadra§nagar Contention of the counsel for the petin'oner is that the petitioner has been relieved vide order dated 12.3.2009 whereas the transfer order itseif has been issueri on 30.6.2009 anéi \i, therefore under no Circumstance, before issuing the transfer order rhe petitioner can be reiieved. It has been further argued that the petitioner has been transferred at the option of Block . l Education otiicer whereas he being a Sports Teacher can only i be transferred by the order of the Soilector. / Counsel for the State submits that there appears to be some typographical mistake in tlie order dated 12.3.2009 and mm aé ’,{~P(/>,)Hql in 200‘? mm (Wu) mmw ammm WWW WW %€}m $aa’f‘ananéw ke a representation to the )f his glievance. Vllér agr€€S m8K€ a ’ representan'on. However she subli Counsel for the petitic is decided, the petitioner may be g Accordingly, the petition is ( the petitioner to make a represer. days from the date of receipt of th would be decided Within a period of its receipt. Till then the impug ' effect to axld the petitioner sha} duties in the present place of post; therefore let the petitioner ma competent authority for redressal its that till his representation Lven some protective order. tisposed of with a direction to .tation Within a pen‘od of ten a copy of this order, the same of three weeks from the date ;ned order shall not be given 1 be aiiowed to perform his 11g. 7// ker Diwake Sdl’ Yriti“ Judge r