^ I^^B?'^:^^^:^.';^^'":;:''. KiSld;'l:::.!^ w^s:^:'^:^''''':\ "•;••'•'..:":'- ii:sii^yss IjBt®'..:; •::::'''":'.':; :::: :.""^ '":>-' ,.• ::'.1' 1 •: :::1.: VSiSBSS^SWiN'SWB:^S,f^^t'JKGF^!^aAS'nS^WS!^t. KKI ^^?,i ^^r:^:ijE][^il@R^;^;.:';; •;: !!'!: ireiT^mTi6N(S)i ifo.^^ a^'itnoNER ^8%?y?S^1'^:"^ SSBSKVK SS^^ii^®s^;-^/ '• • SUMB®; 8SSIB»S!!i*' ^^ ^,--^ vv..l;y^ BI!BME<^^ BIIIBffi^l'^^ :•'' •S5?l->;".' :' ••K®-£|________.:. i: y^ Darasram. Ratiiore son bf late Sohan Lal Rathore, aged abaut 55 years, Upper OivisionTeacher(Social Science) Govemment Middle Schobl, Sarkho, Block Nawagarh, Distnctjanjgir- Champa (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS of Chhaftisgarh, 1. State through Secrptary; Sehool^ Education Departm.ent, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawali, Kaipur (CIihattisgarh) 2. DireGtor, Lok Shikshan ^San(;hanalaya, Raipur (Ghhattisgarh) ! 3^ j ]3istnctEducatibnO:fficer, DistrietJanjgu'-Ghainpa. fflg:.igBB~":,,:': ^: . .'• , :• . .. . ••• :^;:.,.' A,::: ;-:.1;<,." .':' r, ,'1. |||B19&^^UT-U]!n>E»:ASTlC)^^2261,^^ Sli'B MSi ijffi INM^ HiGH COURT OF CHHATTiSOARH : B1LASPUR VVRiT PETiTiON (S) N0.43150F 2COS PsTiTiOhiER Smt. J.tender Lamba Versus Staie of Chhatiisaarh & Others ^ RESPONDENTS W.P.iSj Nos.5981, 544S, 54S}, 5451. 5483. 5484,5485. 5584.575S.5785. 5783,5805,5813,5815,5819, 5820,582S, 583S, 5389, 5890, 5891,6018, 6094, 6204, S339,S34G,3423, S438,5280,5S18, 5533,5578, 6S11, 5SS1, 5591,5811,5817,5927,S930, 6621 & S522 of 2009. (Writ Pstitions under Articte 226 of the Constitution of india) Singie Bench : Hon'bie Shri Satish K. Agnihoiri, J. Present:- Shri H.B. Agrawai, Sr. Advocate With Ms M&era Jajswai, Shri F.P. Sahu, Shri ?>2ateen Siddiqui, Shri P.R. Patankar, Shri Manoj Paranjape, Shri Uttam Pandey, Shri C.J.K. Rao, Shri Roop Naik, Shri A.S. Rajput, Shri K.S. Pawar, Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Shri R.R. Soni, Shri V.K. Pandey and Shri Ashwani Shukia, Advocates for the respective petiaoners. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Dy. Advocata General for the State of Chhattisgarh and tts authorities. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on this 12-" day of November, 2009) 1. With the consent of learned counsel appearing forthe parties, the petitions are heard finaisy. 2. in this batch of maiters it has been brought to the notice of the Court that the transfer ordsrs have been passed without compiying with the policy and in some cases the orders having been executed aiso require reconsideration. 3. Shri Thakur, iearned Dy. Advocate General appearing for the State, on instructions, very fairly submits that all the cases of the petitioners pending consideration before this Court shaii be considered afresh, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the oarties concerned. to examine asto whether the transfer Gowri orders have been passed jn accordance with the policy and tii! that time tha petitioners herein shatl not be dssturbed. Sn v'iew of foregoing, according to iearned counsel appearing for the respective petitionei's nothing survives in these petitions for adjudicatiQn. Accordingiy, the petitions being V.'.P. (S) Nos.431S, 5981, 5448, 5450,5451, 5483, 5484, 5485, 5S84, 575S,8785,57S3,5805, 5813, 5815,5819, 5820, 6326, W39, 5889, 5890, 5891,S018,6094,S2C4, S33S,6340,S423, 6438, 5290, 5518, 5533, 5578, 5S11, 566-!, 5S91, SS11, S817, 5827, 5930, SS21 S> 6S22 of 2009 are disposed of. However, on the basis of submission made by the iearned Dy. Advocate Qenerai, it is niade ciear that the petitioners herein shaii continue on their respective places of posting, as obtalns toeiay, tiii disposai of their respective cases, in accordance with !aw and on its own merits. No order asto costs. ——-— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge li;..