Ravindra Prasad Sinha v. C.G. State Power Distri. Comp. And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(S) No. 492 of 2013 • Ravindra Prasad Sinha S/o B.P.Sinha Aged 58 years, OccupationService, Presently posted as Officer Assistant Grade-1 in the Office of Senior Accounts Officer, Chhattisgarh. State Power Distribution Company Ltd, Raipur (CG) and R/o LIG 78, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Police Station & Post Gudhiyari, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd. Raipur, Through Its Managing Director, Vidyut Sewa Bhawan, Daganiya, P.S. Amanaka, P.O. Daganiya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Chief Engineer (RR)/ Executive Director C.G. State Power Distribution Company Ltd, Gudhiyari, Police Station and Post Office Gudhiyrai, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Engineer (O&M) C.G. State Power Distribution Company Ltd, Daganiya, Police Station Amanaka, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Senior Accounts Officer-1 C.G. State Power Distribution Company Ltd. Gudhiyari, Police Station and Post Office Gudhiyari, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5. Smt. Sujata Sikdaar Wd/o Lt. Subhash Chandra Sikdaar, aged 53 years, R/o Flat No.9, Sri Krishna Landmark, Kota, Raipur, Police Station and Post Office Gudhiyari, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Ms Jyoti Rathore, Advocate For State :

Shri Majid Ali, Dy. Govt. Advocate Respondents 1, 2, 3 & 4 :

Shri K.R. Nair, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 03.12.2018 1.

The petitioner by this writ petition has challenged the order dated

14.02.2013 whereby the earlier order of transfer dated 25.07.2012 which was kept in abeyance has been withdrawn.

2.

The perusal of the records would show that there was no interim protection granted to the petitioner. Moreover, the order-sheet dated 08.07.2013 reflects the contention of the counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has already complied with the order of transfer. 3.

Given the facts, this Court is of the opinion that nothing further remains to be adjudicated upon in the writ petition. 4.

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of as having become infructuous, however, reserving the right of the petitioner to re-agitate in case his grievance still survives.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge vatti