CD (’04 \w $§ngie Eench BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. H g 9 2/ /2011 r’ PETITIONER Kanhaiyalal J'hangel, S/o Pyarela Jhangel, Aged abouf 54 year's, Presem‘Iy posfed and working as head MasTer Primary, school, Bufr‘u, Block, Khair‘agarh, Dis’rf, Rajnandgaon,(CG). ‘ VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. ‘ sme of Chhamsgarh, Through The Secre‘rar‘y, Deparfmenf of School Educafion, D.K.S. Bhowan, Roipur. 2. DisTricTEduca’rionOfficer' Rojnondgoon(CG). K, 3. Shri Hor'i Lal Chondel Aged NoT known S/o Not Know Presemly working as Head Masfer Primary WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ‘Kusum Khai ragarh Dis‘H, Rajanangoon (CG). E\;L> H‘GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR (Writ Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitution of india) Singie Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :— Shri Shashank Thakur, on behalf of Shri Arvind Dubey, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao‘ Government Advocate for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 29‘“ day of August, 201 1) s Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that under the transfer policy dated 13.06201 1, it is cleariy stated that the Coiiector alone is competent to transfer the empioyees beionging to Class-iii & iV services on proposal made by the other departments in approval of the minister in-charge. in the case on hand, it appears that the District Education Omcer without following the guidelines issued in the transfer policy had passed the order impugned, when the Collector has been assigned the responsibility of transfer of the employees working in the concerned district, on proposat of the concerned departments. 'Thus, this suffers from the defect of competence of the officer. Accordingiy, the transfer is unsustainable in the eyes of law. As a resuit. the transfer order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P-1) in respect of the petitioner is quashed. However, liberty is reserved to the government to pass an appropriate order, if so advised, in accordance with administrative exigenoy and in public poiicy, in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the above-extent. No order asto costs. SATISH K. ANGNIHORI Judge ashok Sd/- WRIT PETiTlON (S) NO. 4592 OF 2011 9% PETlTiONER Kanhaiyalal Jhangel Versus RESPGNDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others