-K,\^ -' IN THS HI©_Cg9RSOF JUDIGAIUBE A£ BILASPUB (GBBIITISGAEH) miT PETITION Ho.'^'B^OF 200^ PETIIIONER: ?.'/v^' ..^%<.^--" ^^:''./'' ^•'^^•" :^ ^^' i'^-" y ry^ ^•^' ..h^ SESPONDENIS: ^ / Smt.Pratima Aglawe, wife of Bevendra Aglawe, aged about 30 years, occupation: Shiksha Ko.rmi Gr.ll^ resident of behlnd Mining Office, opposi-be to Malhotra Janta ^uarter, near Laxml Atta chaisM, Mahavir Nagar, Balpur (C.G). Vs. ^'1« State of Ghhattisgarh:through: Seeretary, Paiaehayat Department, Raipur (G.G). ^2. State of G5'ihattisgarh:tbroug]'i: Secretary, School Education Baipur (C:G) " 3* Gialef Exeeutive Officer,Zilla Panchayat^ Baipur(C«G)» 4, Head Master^ GoverBEient Middle Scnool^ NoMatara (B.Bazar)^ ?• Principal ,Goveniment Higher Seeondary School, Bha^soj, Block Arang, district Raipur (C.G). ^" \ i@T_P@ITIOI__gSmR_ ART?GLE_ 226/227_ OP_ THE COHgFITHnON_ OF_ I@BI. °°^ :'^ c^ H;IGHCOURTOFCHHATT!SGARHAT,B|LASPyR Petitioner Respondents WRJT,PiTSTION_N0.4858GF_200S ' Smt. Pratlma Agiawe versus State of Chhatilsgarh and others Present : Dr. Shaiiesh Ahuja, counsel for the petitioner. IVJr. Ajay Dwivedl, Pane! Lawyer for ths State/respondents No.1, 2,4 ard 5. None appears for respoodent No.3. (Passsd on 27th~Day-ofFebruary, 2007) 1. The petitloner, whlie working as Teacher In Government IVIIddle School, Mohatara (B.Bazar) was transferred to Government Higher Secondary SchooS, Bhansoj, Biock Arang, Dlstrict Ralpur, vlde order 11-08-2004 (P-4). The petltioner jolned the new place of postlng at Govemment Higher Secondaiy School, Bhansoj, BJock Arang, District Ralpur, but, thereafter, vid©Impugnsd order dated 19- 08-2004 (P-6), the transfer of the petltloner from Mohatara to Bhansoj was further orders. 2. This Court, vide 'interim order dated 19-10-2005, directed the operation of the Inipygned order 19-08-2004 ff^-G) so far as it relates to the petitjoner was stayed and the petitloner was aiiowed to joln and contlnue at the same place tii! the next of hearing. 3. . VVIth the passags of tlme, the wrlt petltion has become infructuous, to whlch counsei for the No.1,2, 4 5 has no oNectlon. 4. Thus, the writ petltlon Is ^lsmlssed as having become Infructuoys. No as to costs. • ~- Gopal Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge