^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 489 of 2003 Petitioner Dui^a Prasad Kaushik, Son of Shri Kedr Nafh Kaushik, a^,ed 44 years, Compouader, Priraary Healfh C-entre, Bastar, Resident of Bazarpara, Bastar. Versus Respondents 1. State of Chhaftisgarh, through the Miaistry ofHealth, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipiir. 2. The Dh-ector, Healfh. Services, Opposite Mantialaya, Raipur. 3. The ChiefMedical Officer, Jagdalpur, Bastar. 4, The Block Medical Officer, Prunaiy Health Centre, Bastar, Sin^e Bench : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri B. P. Sharaaa, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Pankaj Shnvastava, Panel lawyer for the respondents. .^I^^K:^%!^fcl^ ^•^^ffS^ ORAL ORDER ( 2nd February, 2006) The foUo\vuig order of the Court was passed by Satish K. Agnihotri, J. 1. The petitioner, who was Conipounder at Prunaiy Healfh Centi-e, Bastar was traasferred froin Priniary Healfh Centre Baster, District- Jagdalpur to Prunary Healfh Centre Basaguda, District Dantewada vide order dated 13.12.2001 (Annexure P/l). Being aggneved the petitioner ffled an original application being O.A.No. 26/2002 before the State Adinuiistrative Tribunal, Bench at Raipur. Learned Tribunal . vidfe order dated 11.1.2002 (Annexure P/2) granted status quo as on 5.1.2002. Thereafter vide order dated 11.2.2004 (Annexure P/13) the earlier trao^sfer order dated 13.12.2001 was caaceUed. Accordingly, it is not necessaiy to look in.to the validity of the earUer transfer order dated 13.12,2001, wtuch staads canceUed by the subsequent order dated 11.2.2004. Leamed counsel for the petitioner subinits that fhe petitioner has not been paid salaiy for soiue period. The petitioner prays for Uberty to inake a representation before fhe concemed aufhorities for release of his salary because fhe earlier order dated 13.12.2001 has been cauceUed by the subsequent order dated 11.2.2004, In view of the subinissions inade by leamed counsel for the petitioner, supra, the petition is dismissed witti the above Uberty to fhe petitioner to niake a representation to fhe concemed authority. In case any representation is niade, fhe respondents are directed to cousider fhe same and decide in accordance wifh the law withia a penod of four weeks frora the date ofthe representation. No order as to costs. Certi&ed copy, as per Rules. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Thakur ais