•<;. .,.':.r .^- ^s. />.' r^~'r^-' /\'?.-''v ""^/'' ^f^vo L- E\ THE fflGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH . ./('^y WMT PETITION (S) N0. •3^ /2007 / ^V.C.L. Shrivastava, S/o- Late Shri S.P.Shrivastava, Aged about 55 years, Presently working as Sub-Divisional Engineer (PRO), Office ofTelecom District Magistrate, Bastar, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. PETITIONER J/. .^%^ <^%f ^y S?'-8>' <•$ -^^f c << ."!''T" 'v>s?;'<y ^- €^ ^e^ ^' f^J' ^v\^ O' ^?fifiK;-4 'ffiS '$33^ 2. 3, 4,7 VERSUS Union oflndia, Through - Secretary, Department of Telecommunication, 421, Sanchar Bhawan, 20-Ashoka Road, NewDelhi-110001. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), Through- Chan'man-cum-Managing Director, Corporate Office - Personnel-H Section, 102-b, Statesman House, 148, Barakhamba Road, NewDelhi-1. ChiefGenetal Manger, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL), Chhattisgarh Telecom Circle, Khamardih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Telecom District Manager, Bastar, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar, Chhattisgarh. RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2261 OF THE CONSTLTUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITLIN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, CERTIORARI ETC. ® HIGH GOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SINOLE BENCH : HON'BUE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI. Jl. WRn-PETITION (S.) N0.319 QF 2007 PetiUoner : U.C.L. Shnvastava Respondents Union ®fIndia and ottieis Present : Mr.F^inkajShrivastava.counselforthepetitioiier. Mr. S.K.Beriwal, counsel for respondent No.1 . Mr. R.M.Solapurkar, counsel for respondente No.2 to 4. ORDER (Passed on 22nd Day of Janirary, 2007) The peUtioner, by this peBtion, impugns ttie order drted 6- 12-2006 (Annexure P-1), w4iereunder the prttionar, werktng as TES Group 'B' Offieer, has been transferred from ChhatBsaarh Tetecom Circle to DOT (Hqs.), New Delhi. The application of the petfBoner for absorption in the services <rf ttie Bharat Sanchar N^am Limted is pending conaderation. 2. In normal circumstances, this Cou»tshould not interfere witt the transfer order as this is for the emptoyer to post an employee at any place in public interest and due to administrative exigency. 3. In the facts of the present ease, when the aj^catian of <fte petitioner is pending for Gonsideratfon, it is desirabte that a direetton Qopa) be issued to respondents No.1 and 2 to consider ttie apptjeafion <rf the petittoner for absorptton on mertt in accordance with law witWn a period of four weeks ftom the rweipt of a copy of tWs orcter. In ttie meanBms, the petitioner may be permitted to continue srt ths pfeserrt pla»of posting for a period of four weeks. 4. Thus, the peBUon stands disposed of with ttie aforementioned observations. No order a^to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^s