High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3984/2014disposed off

Anil Kumar Agnihotri v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

2015-08-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3984 of 2014 • Anil Kumar Agnihotri Aged About 52 years Presently Working As Incharge Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Surajpur P.S. Surajpur Distt. Sarguja C.G.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Schedule Tribal & Schedule Caste Development, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Collector, Ambikapur, PS Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

3. Assistant Commissioner Tribal Department, PS Surajpur District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

4. Paras Paikara, Presently Working As In Charge Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Manpur, P.S. Manpur, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Petitioner : None.

For Respondent/State : Shri Shashank Thakur, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 10/08/2015

1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the legality and validity of the order dated 15.7.2014 whereby he has been transferred from Surajpur to Lundra, District Sarguja.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that the petitioner is continuing at the original place of posting for the last one year on

account of interim order dated 8.8.2014 granted by this Court. The State/respondents may be granted liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view public interest and administrative exigency. Learned counsel would further submit that the State/respondents shall not insist upon compliance of the impugned order dated 15.7.2014. It is accordingly ordered.

3. Since no effect could be given to the impugned order on account of aforesaid interim order, it is not necessary to go into the legality and validity of the impugned order in the facts of the case.

4. In view of the above, according to learned counsel appearing for the State, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication at this stage.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Barve