E IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATI'ISGARH AT BILASPUR «LGJ W.P. (S) No. é; cV‘M/(D é;%c> ‘I2009 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. PETITIONER X, \‘ VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. / Kashi Ram Dhanuk S/o— Late shri Meharvan Dhanuk, aged about 59 years, Executive Engineer posted at (E & M) Division, Public Heaith Engineering Department, Jagdaipur, District— Jagdalpur( Bastar) (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Additional Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineering, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) Engineer in Chief, Public Health Engineering Department, Neer Bhawan, Civil Lines Raipur (C.G.) V H!GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPHR Singie Bench : Hun’bie Mr, Just§ce M'itinker mwaker Writ Petition {Si N0. 580 of 20%9 PETiTiONER Kashi Ram Dhanuk Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & another. Mr. F.S. Khare; counsal forthe petitioneri nAy A :»;J IN,;L-A.. ha— ll £ 31.1.]. (‘8- 1 I A t um. HI‘Vnlu uuucy, Fame: LaW'y’Ei' IGI um oLEL‘Ii’E:FGI"IuEi‘ILS. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE Df\hIQTlTI ITIhN {\E lhlnlA ORDER ln0'07-OnnQ\ \uu I éuuu, With the consent of the patties; the matter is heard finaliy. Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 16.1.2009 (Annexure-P-i) passed by the respondent No. 1 whereby the petitioner was transferred from office of Public Heaith Engineering Department; Block Jagdelpur to office of Engineer—in-Chief‘ Public Health Engineering Department. Raipur‘ Grievance of the petitioner is that he is due to retire on 30.1 1 .2009 and as per the policy of Government he ought not to have been transferred at this juncture. He further submits that petitioner is a victim of frequent transfer. On the other handhle‘arhed counsel for the State submits that petitioner has been transferred on administrative grounds and therefore the order impugned does not suffer from any illegality. At this stage. counsel for the petitioner submits that he wants to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file representation before the Competent Authority. He also submits that vide order dated 3.2.2009 stay was granted in favour of the petitioner and therefore the said interim order may be directed to continue till the decision of the representation. Accordingly; the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as aforesaid. 4? To this prayer of the oounsei for the petitioner: counsel for the State has no objection. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn. if the petitioner makes a representation within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order; the same would be decided by the authorities concerned within a period of one month from the date of its receipt strictly in accordance with law. The stay order shaii operate tiil one month from today. Sdl- Pritinker Diwaker Judge