← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/740/2020dismissed

Keshav Ram Dhruv v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-02-04Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP(S) No. 740 of 2020 Keshav Ram Dhruv, S/o. Chandu Lal Dhruv, Aged About 50 Years, Posted And Working As Revenue Inspector At Revenue Circle No. 11, Tikarapara, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Collector Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Additional Collector Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Om Prakash Soni, Posted As Revenue Inspector, Principal, Patwari Training School, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Praveen K. Dhurandhar, Advocate For State :

Mr. Ravish Verma, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 04.02.2020 Heard 1.

Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 17.01.2020 wherein the petitioner alleged that he has been transferred from R.I. Circle 11, Tikrapara, Raipur to Land Record, Raipur.

2.

It is contended that the petitioner was transferred from Surajpur to Raipur on 08.03.2019 and thereafter he has been again transferred by the impugned order dated 17.01.2020, therefore, it will amount to frequent transfer. He further submits that the transfer has been made in the ban period and he referred to the order dated 08.11.2019 passed by this Court in WPS No.9109 of 2019 and submits that the transfer of the petitioner may be canceled.

3.

Reading of Annexure P-1 would show that the petitioner was transferred from Tahsil Surajpur to Collectorate, Land Record Raipur. The order Annexure P-1 prima facie appears to be an internal arrangement in between the office as he was posted as R.I. Tikrapara and now he has been posted at Land Record Raipur. Unless the transfer causes the serious prejudice, it cannot said to be transferred. Moreso, prima facie Annexure P-1 would show it is an office arrangement. Consequently, taking into the nature of distribution of work, I do not find any merit in this case to entertain. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge ashok