(^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. F— ADpellant Petitioner Respondents Writ Appeal No. 478 of 2011 Ravi Lonkar aged about 49 years, s/o Shri D.G. Lonkar, r/o Duplex 27, Babji Park, Ring Road No.2, Bilaspur C.G. VERSUS 1. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, through Chief Regional Manager, Regional Office, 1 Floor, R.K. Plaza, Pachpedi Naka, Ring Road No.1, RaipurC.G. 2. Divisional Mlanager, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Rama Trade Centre, Bus Stand, Bilaspur C.G. Writ appeal under Section 2 of Sub-Section (11 of the Chhattisaarh Hiah Court (appeal to Division Bench) Act. 2006 Present: Shri Mateen Siddique, counsel for the appellant. ORDER (17th October, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri Mateen Siddique, learned counsel for the appellant is heard on admission. ]{- ' . 2 W.A. No.478of2011 vL 2) The appellant has filed this intra Court appeal against the impugned order dated 19.09.2011, passed in W.P.(S) No.5565/2011. 3) The appellant/ petitioner filed the writ petition for the following reliefs:- "i. To kindly quash the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1, Chief Regional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited copy of which is annexed as Annexure P/1. ii. To kindly make any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner." 4) The petitioner, in substance, was challenging the order of his transfer from Bilaspur to Jagdalpur vide Annexure P/1, dated 12.08.2011. 5) The main ground taken by the petitioner in the writ petition for challenging the order of his transfer was that the transfer order was passed in violation ofsome ofthe provisions ofthe 'Transfer Policy'. 6) Learned Single Judge on a thorough consideration of the entire submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner did not find any ground warranting interference in the order of the petitioner's transfer from Bilaspur to Jagdalpur. 7) During the course of hearing, it transpired that the petitioner has been at Bilaspur for a period of about five years. 8) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, we do not find any infirmity either in the order of '^ ff^':iv ., 1 i:ti. .;.<^%1 ^ W.A.NO. 478 of 2011 the petitioner's transfer from Bilaspur to Jagdalpur or in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge declining to interfere in the matter, which may warrant interference in this intra Court appeal. 9) The intra Court appeal, therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge