IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITIOMS} No. Q31,“ OF 2009. v/ PETITIONERM Khemnath Rathora, S/o Late RB. Rathor§, Aged about 591/2 years, R/o F/ 3, Irrigation Colony, Rudri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G. ' Versus / Respondsnts: 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, . ‘Water Resources Department, D. KS. Bhavan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG). Engineer—in—Chief, Water Resources Department, Sihawa Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur (C .G .) Shri N.S. Basra S/o Not know to the petitioner Aged about 53 years, Asstt. Engineer, Office of the Executive Engineer, E & M Division, Machadoli, Water Resources Department, Distt. Korba (C.G.) ) .r WRIT PETITOIN UNDER ARTICLE 226V?OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. HIGH COURT OF CHHA’E‘TISGARH AT 3ILA§PUR SB : HGE§’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PMTINKER DIWAKER wags! Na. aiwizow PETI’E‘KENER Khsmnat’h Rathors RESPONDENTS Staté of CG & Others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CON$TITUTION OF INDIA Appearance: Shri P,S.Koshy, counsal for the petitioner. Shri Yashwaxn Singh Thakur, Dy. AG. wifh Shasham: Thakur, P.L. for the State/asp. No. 1 8r, 2. ORAL ORDER (06.07.2099) ChaEenge in the present writ petition is to tho order datai 30.6.2009 (Annexure P/ 1) by which the petitioner, who is working on the post of Executive Engineer (E 8r, M) has been transfen‘ed from HEM Division, Water Resources Deparmenxf Rudri‘ to the office of Executive Engineer (E 85 M) Water Resources Department Machadoli Division, Distt. Kor'ba. Contention of learned counsei for the petitioner is that he is due to retire on 31.1.2010 i.e. Within seven monthS‘f and therefore as goer the policy of the. Government, he ought‘ i not have been transferred. He further contends that the; pension papers have aheady been processed from the? i present place of posting and if he would be transferreci, the‘ entire process would be disturbed and the petitioner wiil face difhculty. /§ At this stag€, learned counsd for the petitiona submits that he ma 7 be permitted to maka a reprssentation to mspondent No. 1 85 2 anc'i till then he may not be relieved from his present place of ositing. Learned counsel for the State has no objection if a direction for deciding the representation is made Consideiing the totality of the facts, the petitioner is directeo to make a representation to the respondents No. 1 85 2 within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of this order, which shall be decided by the authorities concerned within a further period of 3O days from the date of its receipt. it is ciarified that mil then the petitioner shall not be relieved from the present place of posting, if not already relieved. With the above observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sdl- Pritinker Diwaker " Judge p