£ - ,N5LE Bi IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER: •rf'" ..-•"'A'o i'-'' , ..••••'^ tr ^ ^••""^ " W.P.(S)NO.BO^ /2010 ^H. K. Kurrey S/0 Late A. R. Kurrey aged about 41- years, Occupation- Govt. job Lecturer at District .••^"' ^ Education & Training Institute Kabirdham district- Kabirdham (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS: » »s!«s'-asia^__ * S!t®'ii^'ISfe. ^-2) 3) ^4) State of Chhattisgarh Through it's The Secretary School Education Departmeat, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) The Director. Lok Shikshan Sachanalay Raipur (C.G.) The Director State Council of Education & Research TrainingRaipur (C-C^ . The District Education Officer Distt. Kabirdham ( C.G.) WRIT PETITIONUNDERAURTICLE226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The above named Petitionerrespectfullysubmits as under: 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER As mentioned in the cause title. 2. PARTIGULARS OFTHE RESPONDETS HiGH_CQURTOF_CHHATriSGARH : BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENT WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 3072 OF 2010 H K. Kurrey Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. AgnihotrU. Present:- Shri Ravi Maheshwari, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N.N.Roy, Panel Lawyerforthe State/ respondents. ORDER (ORAD (Passed on this 18th day of February, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner, admittedly, is a teacher of the Tribal Welfare Department. The petitioner, on transfer, wassent tothe School Education Department by order dated' 30.8.2006. The petitioner claims promotion in the School Education Department on the ground that he has been absorbed in the School Education Department. 3. Shri Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the Principai, District Educationand Training tnstitute, Kabirdham, vide letter dated 16.4.2010 has been informed thatthe petitioner was working in the School Education Department not on deputation and he has not been absorbed till date. Itwas further advised that if Ihe petitioner wants absorption in the School Education Department, a proper application should be made to the Tribal Weifare Department. 4. As on date; it appears that the petitioner continues in Tribal Welfare Department and no steps for absorption of the petitioner in the School Education Department has been taken. The petitioner »~ ashok 2 failed to produceany .document&in support of his contentlonthat his transfer was on deputation and he stands absorbed in the School Educatidn Department. Having considered all the facts as aforestated and averments made in the pleadings, there is no merit in the-case, as the petitioner belongs to Tribal Weifare Department and he can clam promotion only in his own department, till he is absorbed in other department namely, in the instant Case, the School Education Department. In view of foregoing, thewrit petitipn is dismissed. No order asto costs Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge v.swsss.'^isafss.ss: