^ AMENDED PETITION IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S) No. PETITIONER ^ Shyamrao Jadhav, S/o. Late Manikram Jadhav, aged about 48 years, R/o. Kududand, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1] 2] 3] 4] State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Panchayat & Gramin Vikas Vibhag, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) Development Commissioner, Panchayat & Gramin Vikas Vibhag, Chhattisgarh Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) N.P. Behra, In-charge Sub-Divisional Officer, Rural Engineering Ser^ices, Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA swy H1GH COURT OR.QNHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRfT PETITION (S) N0.5^2 ©F2©1Q ? PET1TIONER RESPONDENTS ShyamraoJadhav Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of »ieConstitution of India) Single Bench: Hon'bteShri Satish K. Agnihotri»J, Cfc Present:- Bhri Man<^ Pacsyape, Advocate ftr th®petiiionw. Shri Shashank Thakur, Banet Lawyer for ttieEState/ respondeaits -'No.ltoZ.111-'111'11;-—-!1 - -1.. .-•— • -- -•1:1 ;'• r-l: ,.- Shri Anup Majumdar, Advocate forthe r<»sponderrtNo.4. ORDERfORAU (Passed on this 05 day of Jufy, 2011) ^% By this petition, ttie petitioner seetes a writfor setting aside tha in^>ugned order dated 14.07.2010 (Annexure P-1) passed by the re^ondent No.1 and furtherseeks a direction to the r^pondentsto pass a fresh oreler in respect pf posting of the Sub Dhnsional Officer, Rural Engirwerir^ Services, Sub Dh/isionNawagarhiDisfrictJanjgir-GhanBpa.htviewof AnnexureP-2 & P-3. At the very oytset, tearned counsel appejaring for »iepartfesyry fi&lrly and jpintly submite that thf issue jnyolved in this cas®is %|uarely covered by the decision of this Court passed in Ram^ffmar Cftandm y^^^^S^ ol Chhattisgarh& Ottws m W.P.(S) No. 6851/2009, decide^^n 6th Apnl, 2010 and submits that this petition may be dt8p<^ed of in teRns of Ramkumar Chandlra (supna). This CourtmRamkumarQhandna (supra^ ofc^eryed as ynder^ ? ; •^. ^.^ "fO It is well seWed principlw of ^&w as hefcf te umpteennumber (^jca^es^ths^ ^i^Si^w^lffirf dliscff^ifm in ^ aGfrroo/sfrafe^ shoufc? Ae Ifee iSrs^ snd fbfemost nequtpement fbr :'"pos ffg^ayi*'^ empfo^ <^ jE^^^ o^ a seoKy en^oy^®OT t|e | cadfe is afsoin ffiepublic inteiesh 11. Ignoring the claim of the peSVoner to c^ciate or )ook after the work of supenor ofBce, in case of non-availability of offhser onthesupenorpost often ^ ^"^ resyfts fngrawe injusffoeand hwirt-bur^ng. This may shatter ffie nmial of manyyxxS oflfce/s wfw •are ^uperseGfed due to sis arbi^amMss, such actions wtwh a/e iOTreason^bte and' discrinwtatory. , , 12. In the case on hand, the memo was issued keepir^ln wew ie above-stattecfprinciple tnnvvd. The authQiitieshawe completely ignowd thememo as wellas ttiejwbfic interest while^pc^r^ (fte rBspo/xfenfA/aS, w^ wasyt/nfor fo (he fieWwieft asitis not ttw caseof ttw lespondwttsffmt ff?®/® is any alfegaiton w any offw leason, wfwh pFe^n^^ Stste/^pondeni&fh^ maS<mQMm peWoner as In-chafge Assstant gnginew (Sul> Diwskme^OfRcer), in ffyBama whewhe isaffeafly posted" ashOt. 4. In view of foregoing, the impugned ordter dated U.07I2010 ^inexure P-1) is quashed and the petition is allowed in terms of Ramkitmar Chandra (supra). No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge "^^,