C^- f IN THE HON'BLE HI&H C@yRTOF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR w.p. (s) NO. Mi' [y _ / 2011 Petitioner , Bharat Ram Kaushik, Aged about 35 \,.--^^ years, S/o Late Shri Mohanlal <x^f^-l> ^'y -*^*' -..-•"" Kaushik, Secretary (Panchayat Karmi) ^A",.'-r^(5.y?'' "'...-•'' 6ram Panchayat Minminiya (Jungle), Janpad Panchayat / Block Bodla, Distt. Kabirdham-(C.6.) ~y-:y..>"^ ^y^--^rv7 <^..--"" ^ s^6u' 1) Versus Respondents 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary Panchayat, &.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur-(C.6.) 2. Chief Executive Officer, Oistrict ^" Kaw,'ardha-(C.6.) 3. District Panchayat Kabirdham, Through - Its Chief Executive 4. Kabirdham-(C.6.) WRIT PETtTCON UNbER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTCTUTION OPIN&IA r-iB i^^^^A S3B;K»"-"""";^ ^te»^fe^ Hi<3U.COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH : B!LASPUR WRiT pEimQN_(S) NQ, 4SMOF2011 'ITIONER Bharat Ram Kaushik /? RESPONDENTS Versus Stats of Chhattisgarh & Ot'ners {Writ Petltion under Artic!e 226 of the Const'tuiion of India! Sinaie Bsnch : Hon'bie Shri Satish K. Aanihotri. J. Present:- Shri Anii Singh Rajput, Advocate for the oetitioner, Shri Arun Sao, Government Advocate for the State. ORDER (ORALi (Passed on this 12'" day of August, 2011) Learned counsei aoosarinq for the Detitioner suomits thai the petitioner has been transferred bv the ImDuaned order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P-1) working as Panchayat Karmi from Viiiage Panchayat Minmlnlya (Jungle), B!ock Bodia to Viilage Panchayat Renaakhar Khurd. Block Kawardha, Vi/hich is contrarv to the decision ot" this Court in Om Prakash v. State of Chhattisgarh & OOTers. The instant case is squarely covered by the decis'on of this Court in Om Prakash (suprw. Leaned counsei appearing ror the State submits that In view of the order oassed in Om Prakash I'suora'), this order is not sustainabie. However, iiberty may be granted to the respondents to pass apDroDriate order, in accordance v/ith iaw on its own merits. In view of foregoing, the impugned order dated 15.07.2011 (Annsxure P-1) in respect ofthe petitioner is quashed. Accordinalv. the writ oetition is aliowed to ihe above extent. No order asto costs. Sd/- SATISH K. ANGNMORI Judge SSHOK Vrit PeStion (S) No.3238 of 20'i0, decMed on 05.08.2011