IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) . WRIT PETITION fS.l N0. 5<3^ /2011 PETmQNER ^^ ^^ ,.--;^"^>:" .^yy Suman Ram Hidako, aged about 34 years, Son of Shiya Ram Hidako, at ?•" / present workingas a Patwari, P.H.No 8, BadegBdra, katekalyan Distt Dantewada (C.G.) ^ RESPQNDENT5 1. 2. 3. 4. VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Additional Secretary, Revenue and calamity Management Department , D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.), Collector Dantewada, District South Baster, Dantewada (C.G.) Sut) Divisional Officer,(Revenue), Distt South Baster, Dantewada (C.G.) Sub Divisional Officer, (Revenue), Kondagoan Distt Baster(C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OF THECONSTI- TUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT OR MANDAMUS/CERTIORARI.ORDER/ORDERS. DIRECTION/ DIRECTIONS ETC. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER WRTTPETmON fS) No. 3024 of2011 Suman Ram Hidako. RESPONDENTS VE.RSUS Stafe ofChhattisgarh & Others. WKIT PETITION UNDER ARTtCLE 226 OF THE CONSTrmTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Sattsh K. Aenihotn: J. Present: ShriVislmuKoshta,Advocateforthepetitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Deputy Goveroment Advoeate for the State/respondents. ORDERfORAL) (Passed on 16th day ofJune, 2011) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits tliat vide order dated 15.07.2010 (Aimexure P/2), the petitioner, working as Pat\vari at P.H. No. 8, Badegadra, Katekalyan, District Dantewada has been transferred to Tahsil Qffice, Kondagaoii, District Bastar, on admirusbrative grounds. However, the petitionet- has not yet been relieyedto jomtfae new place ofposting. Shri Koshta submits that onee the order of transfer has been passed, it is for the wvemment to ensure fliat it is complied with immediately. He relies on a decision ofthe Supreme Court in Sreedam Chandra Ghosh v. State ofAssam & others , in support ofhis contention that ifthe order is not complied with, a direction can be issued for enforcement thereof. 2. Shri Dwivedi, leamed Deputy Govemment Advocate appearmg for fhe State/respondents submits that that if the transfer. order dated 15.07.2010 (Annexure P/2) is still in existence and has not been complied with, appropriate steps would be taken to comply wiflithe order. 3. Ifthe aforesaid transfer order is still in existence, fhe govemment is under an obligation to comply with the same at once. It is accordmgly directed that the transfer order shall be complied with forthwith, within a period oftwo weeks. 4. Accordingly, fhis petition is disposed of. * (1996) 10 SCC 567 <?-•