HI6H COJRT OF CHHATUS6ARH AT 8ILASPUR &IVISIQNBENCH •)S HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV ©UPTA,CJ & HON'BLE 5HRI SUNIL KUftlAR SINHA. J. Writ ApDeal No. 12 of 2008 Appeliant reTiTioner Resoondents SN Sinoh Aged about 56 years, S/o Pen Singh, Tcnsiidar, Sakri, Gistrie'i' Bilaspur (C6 1. State of Chhattisgarh Tlirough : the Secretary Department of Revenue, &au tofycn Singh Bhawan -Raipur(C6) 2. The Avar Sachiv, Department of Revenue and Caiamet/ /Acmagement, 6cu Kalyan Singh Bhawon Raipur (C6) 3. Jai Shankar Urao (Fa'thers name not known to the petitioner), working as Naib Tahsildar, Tah. 6aniyari, t>istt. Biiaspur (C6) Writ Appeal under Sectipn 2(1) pj the_Chhattisqarh_l-lighJ:oyrt (ADpeai tp Division Bench) Act, 2006 R/'w Rule lo7 (iplof Chhattisgarh yiqhCoyrtRyles^20p5. Present: Shri Shri Manoj Parcinjcye, counsel for the appelitint Shri Vinay 1-iarit, Depu-iy Advocate Seneral for the State. (II* February. 2008) The following Judgment of the Court was passed by Rajeev Supta. C.J. :;$=r\ '•' .•j?'"" "-1T:'^ '^! i-!!--T--./ i "'Va&aSi 1 •^tSKvG!^ Learned counsel for the parties are heard on admission. 2) Appellant - SN Singh has fHed this writ oppeal against the impugned judgmsnt dated 22" of January, 2008, passed !R writ petition (S) No.S686 of 2007. 3) Appellant - SN Singh filed the writ petition for the fotlowino reiiefs : 1. To call the entire records of the case. 2. To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing / setting - aside the impugned transfer order dated 31.08.2007 (P-l) 3. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, thereby directing the respondent authorities concerned to a!!ow the petttioner to work ut the present place of postin9 i.e. at Sub Tohsil Sakri, DisU. Bitaspur. 4. To issue any other order (s), direction (s), writ (s) which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the instdnt petition. 4) The appellant / petitioner- thus in substance was challenging the order dated 31.08.2007 whereby the appelldnt/petitioner stood transferred from Tohsil Sakri to Tahsil fianiyari, within the same district of Bilaspur. 5) TTie submissions advanced on behalf of the ocoellant / petitioner did not find favour with the writ Court, resulting in the dismissal of the appetlcuifs wr-it petition vide impu9ned judgment dated 22nd Jnrsusry, 2008. 6) Durin9 the course of hearing, it tr-anspired that ©aniyari, the place where •Hie oppellant now stonds transferred is at a ^s?^^ <"c<t, ^^^^^. s^t?.'7°B:!3^';t')' 10, distance of less than 20 km from the appellonfs present ptace of posting Sakri tind both these places are within the district of Bilaspur. 7) On due consideration of the submissions gf leamed counsel for the parties we do not find any inflrmity in the im 1^111 judgment whereby 1+ie appellant's wr-it petition was dismissed and 1+ie order of appellanfs transfer dated 31.08.2007. We, therefore, do not find any scope for interference in this writ appeai 8) The writ appeal; therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed summarily^_, Dadma Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- SunilKumar Sinha Judge cn • \'<" ^I-»T|<"O