•^; IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATriSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION N0. 4-1S3 /2004 PETITIONER^%w; ^^ ^^^ 'x< R.amadhar Dewangan S/o Late Shri Dallu Ram Dewangan, aged about 56years,Assisfant Grade-III, Jal Sansadhan Bibhag [Water Resourcement Department] Pantora, Distt. Janjgir-champa [C.G.] VERSUS '^.^ y ^ RESPONDENTS ^ 1. The State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Water Resourcement Deparfment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur [C.G.] 2. Sub Divisional Officer, Hasdeo R.B.C. Sub Division No.l, Pantora, Distt. Janjgir-Champa WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE GONSTITUTION OF INDIA R3R ISSUANCE OF A WRFT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. PROHIBITION, CERtlOR.ARI EtC. R3R OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN TH& MATTER. 4-; «it*<CTi^»*is<a» 'SSI -tM'Wf^t, •8Ttl*l<l<a,;;fa<?]'l*1i1<. ..w^£..^....^3aj^ 200 311^1 qit (5-li*. TT^T Sn^ff'sft^t^t Sf^f 'q^^'ici(yi<i<f) TOiratv9ss sv^v 14/01/2005 Shri S.B.Singh Patel, coun Shri Vinod Shrivastava. G., Heard. This instant petition has el forthe petitioner. i. fortheState. been filed by the petitioner jchallenging the transfer order of Annexure P-1 fjated 18/10/2004 by which the petitioner has been transferred from Water Resburces Division, Pantora toWater Resources Division, Dantewara in violation of Learned counsel for the pej Annexure P-2, no transfer^ rjnade ^WJOT after 18/10/2004. However, the impugned order was passed on transferred .to a distance of 800 employee who has responsibility erroneous and therefore he prays | empldyee and no ground is mac| exercise undeFArtiole 226/227 of < State of Raiasttian Vs. Anand in this regard and states thatthe p^tition desen/es to be dismissed. 1 have heard learned coun^ transfer order of the petitiorier who| *l<l.!i'lj!i1-< VWvS ^Is^ (RntSK. ^? ^fRPT STT^T :ran.sfer cfrdervide Annexure P-2. jtioner submits that as per the transfer order of l?t 118/10/2004 itself and by this order he was ]<ms. as the petitioner is a low paid Class III bfhiswidow mother. The order of transfer is |hat the same is tq be quashed. Learned counsel for theSt^te/respondent submifs that.transfer has been made on the administrative grounp and the same cannot be questioned by t,tie e out which warrants an interference in the Sonstitution of India and it is upon the State to exeroise the same unless it is shotvn that it has been done malafjdely or against the prohibition of law. Leamed courisel for the Stfete relies on 2003 Voltsne7 SCC Pa.ge 403, Prakash Sisodiva and also relied 2003 Vo/ume 4 SCC 104 PubllcServicfeTnliuiwlBar.AssociaeonVs.Stafe ofU.P. el for the parties and 1 have gone through the was posted in the present place of posting for the last several yeare which is n(rt disputed by the petitionei and after going. Gi.DRJ—PSS50—12/2000—50,000. 4- ft S sn^r^T [4-ll=h 'tTt'IT Sf^l sh^icti <1ffRITW*il<*» 's^r ^iTqTcT^ afliw i<a,.;^^iwy,<' .. w-^^^^ "•^^00 3i^^xR^( 'jgiigi^S) through the above oase lav/s c opinion that there is no merit dismissed and accordingly, it is Consequently, M.C.P. disposed of. fed by the cpunsel.for the State, lam of the i|i the petition and the same desen/es to be dlsmissed. . [). 5017^004 and I.A. No. 9416/2004 stands Nt a* 'cht1li^'ti1*t fli^<?iT.^f ^s^ <^it$i< ^ SlfgiT 3II^T ;<, Sd/- / Dhirendra Mishra Judge Gt,ORJ—FS/350—12/2000—50,000. ; '•\\'.' l|;'S'i