Wxm7 ® IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHAT'IISGARH AT BILASPUR @y $§mg§@ $€§m§w w.P.’ (5) No. ' Egj/ i/zog9 efifioner i / Ram Veer Singh Tamar, S/o shri Soban Singh Tomar, Aged abouT 48 r . years, Posfed as Senior Horticuhur‘e Developmenf Officer af Govt Udyan Ropadi Arjunda, Disf‘r. Durg -(C.&.) Versus espondents 1 ., 1. S’rafe of ChhaHisgar'h, Through — The R Secrefury, Agricul‘i’ure Depar’rmen‘r, D.K.S. Bhuwan, Raipur, Manfralaya Raipur, Disff. Raipur—(C.G.) The Direcfor, Horticulmre Raipur, Dish‘. Raipur— (6.6.) The Dy. Director Horficuh‘ure, Distf. Durg-(C.6.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSUTUTION OF INDIA P ’ wkaa #3 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPI IR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 5591 of2009 PETITIONER : Ram Veer Singh Tomar. VERSUS RES?ONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & Others. WRIT ?ETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Him’ Ie Skri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Anil Singh Rajput, Advocate for the petitioner. G1. i mm P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 25‘ day of September, 2009) By ’{his petition, the petitiene; impugns the order dated 30m June, 2909 (Annemre P/4) passed by the respondent No. 1 whereby the petitioner who is working as Senior Horticuiture Development Officer: has been transferred from Arjunda, District Burg to Ambikapur, on administrative grounds. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the order dated 15m December, 2008 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 592/2006 (Ram Veer Singh Tamar v. State ofChhattz‘sgarh (Q Others), the respondent authorities have passed the order dated 2nd September, 2009, (Annexure P/S) whereby the petitioner has been aliowed to continue at his present piaee ofposting i.e. at Baiod, District Durg. On perusal ofthe record, it’is clear that the order dated 2nd September, 2009 (Annexure P/5) has been passed in the name of the Governor, directing the petitioner to continue at Balod, District Durg after passing of the order by this Court in WP. No. 592/2006. Thus, the order dated 30m June, 2009 (Annexure 13/4) which has been impugned herein, automatically stands cancelled, and as such. there is nothing for adjudication in this petition. In View of the order dated 2nd September, 2009 (Aimexure P/S) the petitioner shall continue at his present place ofposting itself. r 1 . Sd/' : Satish K. Agnihotri p " ‘ ‘ Judge ' \v ‘m‘ Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.