IN THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.t ,s WRIT PETITION N0. ( 3J 7 OF 2006 PETITIONER 4..^ .^^ ..••"^§%i/" ^^^^s^ ->&<&L/-/ ^yy !<^' ^n Ram Prasad Tumaniya, Son of Late Shri D. J. Tumaniya, aged about 58 years, Resident of Central Jail Campus, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). Presently posted on the post of Jailor, Central Jail Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Department of Home, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.). The Director General of Police (Jail), Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.). -^^ si'rs^%< y <&"^^'^- •^ f.r/C~^\, sr^.s 1 i.sAt-.<a.cs>^>; » WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/^27 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF AWRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS, PROHIBITION AND/OR A SUITABLE DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER XI-HC-78 sn^Tqirf^iN; craTanOTstiHi'f 'ssf ^iiiiiff^, isiTnu'is, R<ii^^< t-nw^l Sh*11th ^..r...^.i^^2oo4 3n^r q?ra? (yii^q^) STOTWBfel'3TI^T 4-8-2006 Mr. Sandeep Dubey, couns]el Mr. Sumesh Bajaj, Govt. Ac^ Heard both the counsel. Return has already been fll^c By the instant writ petition of India, the petittoner has cha!lei|iged passed by respondent No.1 whei| from Centrat Jail, Ambikapur to Superintendent. Learned counsel for the pef the grounds raised in the petiUon] has aiready served more than 11 going to retire by the end of 2( transferred within the home distt already made a representation to] Annexure P-4, but to no avail. submitted that looking to the petiUoner, the petitioner may be to respondent No.1 and respondei| to which leamed counsel appeaj objedion. Having heard learned coun^et facts and circumstances of the on merit of ths case, the requ« petitioner is Just, fair and reasonat^le. to make a detailed representetior wrferift^ wicft'ffte^ rfSre?R; ^iSli^ITsn^T forthepetilioner. vocate for the Stete/respondents. I'd. jnder Articto 226/227 of the ConsUtutfon his transfer order dated23-2-2006 |eby the petitioner has been transferred pistrict Jail, Jashpur as In-charge Jail [itioner submitted ttiat he js not pressing The only request is that the pet'rtioner years in the Naffllite area and he is |l07, ttierefore, he ought to have been ^ict Mahasamund. The peUtioner has respondent No.2, copy <rf the same is Therefore, learned counsel further tbove difficulties and position of the llowed to make a repr^entetion afresh ibt No.1 be directed to decide the same, fing for the State/respondents has no caise ^et for the parties, having regard to the and writhout expressing any opinion ^st made by learned counsel fbr the ?. Therefore, the petitioner is allowed raising alt his grievances annexing a P.T.O. 'JSSsv^Sv^Vi' '* .^ XI-HC-78 ^^ '^WM'f, WT^W[6, ^viWy, +1W01I sh*ll<sb y,P,(S('7 WT 200^ 3n^r iraw (lyi^sii^sr) sn^r^rf^TRi (WT3t1^TS»*l Soma WTTWHfStrsn^r 2. copy of the writ petition to respond4r respondent No.1 is directed to deci|de from the date of its receipt after petittoner, in an objecth/e manner,| law. Interimorderdated 21-3-20061 With the direction afore^id, Consequently, M.(W.)P.N<ts. No.4859/2006 also stand disposed | Parties are entitled for certifi4d ^nt No.1 within ten days from today and the representation within one month |considering the points raised by the I on its own merits, in accordance with [stands vacated. the petition stands disposed of. ts.1010/2006, 1854Q006 and IA |of. Gopyofthisorder. L.C. Bhadoo Judge <01<<Ft-l'ifl-l 11HMT ff fetfl' <Rl<riil< .^srf^q'a.n^r ^ P.T.O.