High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/1567/2018disposed off

Smt. Prasanna Pandey v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-02-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1567 of 2018 Smt. Prasanna Pandey W/o Prakash Pandey, Aged About 32 Years Posted As Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) Primary School Beltukri, Janpad Panchayat, Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. The Block Education Officer, Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Bharat Rajput, Advocate For State :

Shri Majid Ali, Dy. Govt Advocate S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 19/02/2018 Heard.

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing order of transfer dated 15.9.2017 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Primary School Beltukari, Block, Takhatpur to Primary School Sawantal, BlockTakhatpur.

2. Grievance of the petitioner is that after the order of transfer was issued, the petitioner made a representation to the authority and she was

-2permitted to remain at the present place of posting. But now again, abruptly, under the impugned order dated 1.2.2018, instructions have been issued by the respondent relieving the petitioner to the transferred place.

3. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly taking into consideration the limited scope of writ jurisdiction in a transfer matter, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would meet if the petitioner is permitted to make a detailed representation to respondent No.3.

4. Accordingly, this petition is finally disposed off with a direction to the petitioner to prefer a detailed representation to respondent No.3/Chief Executive Officer. Respondent No.3, in turn, shall consider and decide the petitioner's representation on its own merits within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the representation.

5. Till the representation of the petitioner is decided by the authority, the status quo with regard to place of posting, as it stands today, shall be maintained.

Sd/----/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Praveen