$iNGiE @EE€@% V/\ CV/dv% \. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT §ILASPUR WRIT Pm'rmn (S) SC? l 4— [2006's.3 PETITIONER [M SMT. ALAKNANDA DUTTA (PAUL) w/o Shri Pulak ?au1 Aged About 32 Yrs By. Post—Upper Division Teacher Govt. Higher Secoundry School Dharampura, Jagdalpur , District Bastar (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Mantralya Raipur.(C.G.) Under Secretary , Department of Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Mantralya Raipur.(C.G.) Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Jagdalpur, Bastar (C.G.) Principal, Govt. Higher Secoundry School Dharampura, Jagdalpur , District Bastar (C .G .) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI MANDAMUS ETC ¢ HI6H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUk WP. No. 5014 of 2006 Pe'rifioner Sm'r. Aiaknanda DU'Ha (Paul) Versus Respondents S‘mfe of Chha‘t‘tisgarh and o'rhzrs SB: Hon‘ble Mr. Jus‘rice Satish K. Agnihufri, J Shri Avinash K. Mishm, Advocate for ‘rhe pe'ri'rioner. Smt Anju Ahujg, Depu'h; Govemmenf'AdvoL-a‘re for ‘Hne responden‘ts. ORDER (13“ sep+ember, 2006) The following ordar of The Cour+ is passed by 5etish K. Agnihofri, J. 1. The pe‘ri‘rioner who was working as Upper Division Teacher- in Government Higher Secbndary Schaol, Dhammpum, Jagdalpur, District- Basmr and was fransferred Vida order da‘red 4*“ Ju!y, 2006 (Annexure P/l), has filed this pefi‘rion impugning +he‘ fmnsfer order- on me ground 'rha‘f fhe hunsfer has been made m a place for which she has never made an eppHca'rion. 2. A? this point learned counsel cenfines his prayer- seekihg permission of‘ ihis Caur'i' 1'0 pursue her represeniafion dafed 12"“ July, 2006 (Annexure Pl3), pending before the responden? Ne.2. Learned counsel appearing for the ofher side hes no objeefion ‘ro ihe prayer made by learned counsel for The pe‘l’ifioner 3V Accordingly, 'i'his pe‘l’i‘rion is dismissed as withdrawn wi‘i‘h the above s‘ro‘red liber'iy, However, in fhe facts and circumstances of the case the respondent No.2 is directed to consider the pending representation dated 12*“ July, 2006 (Annexure 9/3} and decide the some on its own merit, in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order, as to costsi i J Satish K. Agnihotri Judge H‘_-V_ o, i i Sd/— Thakur l