.», -^G PageN^ c €-^ov IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH ATBILASPUR W. P. (SINO. ^c7?'/ /2Q06 PETITIONER ...<^ Narad Singh Netam, S/o Shri Jhaggar Singh Netam, aged about (f^ 43 years, Occupation: Service .t* <5^'*''''^: ..• ^i (Lecturer) In-charge Assistant s^py^y/ pro]ect officer LT-D-P- (ir ^'v"^'^' ^ ^yy^ «&" ^ ..A' '^ ^ ^' Project Officer I.T.D.P. (integrated Tribal Development Project) Kondagaon, District - Bastar, (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^•: 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary, Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste Development Department, D.K.S. Bhawan Raippur (C.G.) ^- 2. The Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.). .3. The Collector, Distt. Bastar at Jagadalpur (C.G.). ^4. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar, (C.G.). /5. The Project Administrator, Integrated Tribal Development Project Kondagaon, District - Bastar, (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATEWRIT. DIRECTION. ORDERTO_DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER XI-HC-22 Sn^rqir f^(R)3n^T St)*< flf?cT «». padma 753 -^MM^, W^S\W\<a, (slMKriy 111MI S6*ll«*> sn^TT'raw ..^..^€^.-^^o<}(/06 3I1^T?¥(ITW(lfS(T +i<iFc)''fl.f ui*<<-i1'fftecfl'<t»i^i< ^siRwsn^T 29/11/200S Shri Manoj Mishra, counse| Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. Govt.| Heard. Petitioner is a iecturer. E| order dated 06/10/2001, he wa| Pharasgaon and thereafter he waj Officer, IPDP, Kondagaon. State 29/OS/2006 repatriated his servi services under control of Coliector Contention of the petitions for the petitioner. Advocate forthe respondents/State. ariter he was posted at Darbha. Vide s posted as Biock Education Officer, s posted as in-charge, Assistant Project povernment vide impugned order dated |ces for teaching work and kept his ^ is that petitioner's services are within the contro! of Tribal Departme^it, therefore, his services cannot be handed-over and kept in the contr^l of Coilector by mid-session transfer. During the argument, learr^ed counsei for the petitionsr couid not demonstrate how the order pass4d by the State Govemment is without jurisdiction. So far as mid-sessi^n transfer is concerned, that is not a ground for interfering with the |adminis{rative orders passed by the Government. in view of the above, the rietition is liable to be dismissed and is accordinaiv dismissed. !n ths iight of above| .A.No.10521/2005 stand disposedl order, M.W.P,No_4508,'?006 and ._..//„.. of. Sd'- V.K. Shrivastava Judge (tft^^f^)