IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT wnt Petttton NO. Petitioner ^ ^ ^^^%^"" 5^-p" te**' <^-Smt. Rajbala Guru 46 Yrs- w/oP.K.Sullerey '" R/o Q.No. 3B, Street 24, Sector 10, Bhilai, Durg , ^ Respondent VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, ^. Through: Secretary, Deptt. of Higher Edu, DKS Bhawan, M.antralaya, Raipur ,2. Smt. Premlata Mishra Age & w/o not known Piesently Asst. Professor at Govt. College, Abhanpur, Distt. Raipur ^"3. Smt. Sarita Swami Age & w/o not known Presently Asst. Professor at Govt. College, Arjunda, Distt. Durg WRIT PETITION U/A. 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION XI-HC-22 3^? •<11<(ICI-4, ^TllwKS, fSlcllti'^1. 311^1 ^5)ch / ^^..W:.T:.'^6Q/_ _. , [ C^. M11MI ^>i^jtb ••'-"•••-••••••^">yg^ 200^ \^lo ^ sn^rw R-fi+sn^r sfeiiw tfRa sn^n'gRiiWdf^tf *l<lti-l41-) KWcft'ir'fekn <R|<<1< ^3)^T3fn^T v ^ --7- . Raja Sharma, counsel fo Miss Deepali Pandey, Panel the petitioner. o.wysr for the 5tcts/r'espondent No.l, cn advance copy. Heard. 8y this writ petition under ^v^'ic\e 226 of the Constitution of India, ths petitioner has questioned the prop 2006 (Annexur'e P-1), whereby the to ,Ar-junda. The main grievance of the p •iety and iegality of the order- dated 30-6- petitioner hss been transferred from Utai ^titioner is that the impugned transfer has been made in order to cccomtnodatel respondent No.2 who has opted for posting (dent No.3 who hos opted to ieave Arjunda. ng in C\ass-X ct Bhital snd her husband is 'efor-e, by the inipugned transfer her whole st Utai and to accommodate respo^ The petitioner's daughter is study employed ct Bhiiai Steel Plsnt, the.^i famiiy wii! be adversely affected. Learned counsel for the bs'i'itioner' submits that husbsnd of the petitioner is working at Bhilai St^ei Plont and on account of the impu9ned t"snsfer', her famiiy wHI be separa1| iying yacant in the same Coileg) ed. He also argued that one post is aii'eady ^ from where the petitioner" has been transferred and therefore, resjiondent No.l eould have accommodated respondent No.2 on t.hat post. Ttjer'efor'e.the petitioner mcy be siloMfed to fflske G representction to responijent No.l rais'mg ail these grievcnces and respondent No.l be directed to e^ecide the same, to which learned counsel appesring for the State/'responden No.l has no objection. (<<)•&y^-) XI-HC-22 s^ •^MK'i'ii, ®Tn<-f'is,Isiciiyy Sliqyi <^s|ch H11WI snwti •••••-••-••••••••••••/Hq-200< Rl'b.d"""""" sn^rq^ R-fi+SII^T sniitidfeT p' Soma t ^' < 3<i^n ewiwflfer £- Hoving hecrd lesrned counsel ana circumstances of the case and w| the case, the request made by lear'i and reasonabie. Therefore, the repr'esentation raising all her grjevai^ respondent No.l within ten days froi decids the r-epresentation within on^ eonsidering the points raised by •i\ occordsnce with iaw. With the direction aforesaid,| Consequently, M.(W.5P.No.25t Pa-tles sre entitied for certil for the parties, having regard to tha focts |ithout expressing any opinion on merit of )ed counse! for ths petitioner is just, fair' jetitioner is altowed to mske a detaiied |ces annexing a copy of the writ petition to |i today and respondent No.l is dirscted to month fr-om the date of its receipt after se petitione!", in an objective monner, 'm 'nu^Ici^l-t lllflTffte^t'<(5|+<;R ^sri^iTsn^r the petition stcnds disposed of. 86/2006 aiso stands disposed of. ied copy of this order. Sdi- L.C.Shedso Judge (^y^) /