'[—- SlN^ix ^^^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Sl N03^.^0F 2010 PETITIONER(Sl / R.C. Verma, S/o Shri Laxmi Prasad Verma Aged about 57 years Presently working as Superintendent Gomarda Abhyaran, Raigarh (C.G.) i RESPONDENT(S) ..4// ^..w^ o^4X/ ^ ^ f/ / /<v / .^^/7 ^' <^ ^' // VERSUS / 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary Department of Forest D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya Raipur (C.G.) The Under Secretary State of Chhattisgarh Department of Forest D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya Raipur (C.G.) ,3. Shri R.K. Jangde Presently posted as Sub Divisional Forest Officer, Aavapalli Beejapur Forest Division District Bastar (C.G.) WmT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ._--.A_. PETITIONER RESPONDENTS H!GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETJTION (S) N0.3897 OF 2010 R.C. Verma Versus Stafe of Chhattisgarh & Others Arun (Writ Petitlon under Article 226 of the Constitution of india) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satlsh K. Agnthotri, J. Present:- Shri P.K.C. Tiwan, Senior Advocate with Shri Sumit verma, Advocate for the oetitioner. Shri Ajit Slngh, Panel La^er for the State. ORDER ('ORAU (Passed on this 29th day of Apri!, 2011) 1. Heard iearned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks to chaiienge the legaSity and validity of the order dated 15/07/2010 (Annexure P/1) by which the petitioner nas been transferred from Raigarh to Koriya. 3. Learned counsei appearing for the State submits that the petitioner has already continued at the original place of posting for more than 8 months on account of interim order dated 02/D8/2010 granted by this Court. The State may be granted Eiberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in vie'w publlc interest and administrative exigency. Learned counsel further submits that the State shail not insist upon compliarsce of.the impygned order dated 15/07/2010 (Annexure P/1). .Et is accordIngEy ordered. 4. Since no effect could be given to the impugned order 15/07/2010 (Arsnexure P./1) on account of the interim order dated 02/08/2010. Et is •not necessary to go into the iegality and validity of the impugned order dated 15/07/2010 (Annexure P/1), in the facts ofthe case. 5. • The State Government Is at liberty to pass a fresh order as afore-stated. However, the is dlrected to consider that the officer concemed may 'be transferred and posted where the post heid by the petitioner is available. 6. in view of the above, according to leamed counse!' appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in thls for adjudicatlon at thls stage. 7. Accordlngly, the writ petition stands disposed of No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge