← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3638/2016disposed off

Virendra Kumar Masih v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-08-11Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 3638 of 2016 Virendra Kumar Masih S/o Vijay Kumar Masih, Aged About 52 Years Posted As Watchman, Deputy Director, Fisheries (Training Institute), Telibandha, Ravigram, Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary, Department Of Fisheries, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) 2.

Under Secretary, State Of Chhattisgarh, Department Of Fisheries, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) 3.

Director, Directorate Of Fisheries, New Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) 4.

Gajendra Kumar Patre, Posted In Assistant Director, Fisheries, As Talab Choukidar, North Bastar- Kanker, District Kanker, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate For Respondent-State :

Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Dy. Govt. Advocate, on advance copy.

Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J.

Order on Board 11/08/2016 Heard on admission.

1.

The transfer order is challenged only on the ground that the petitioner is being Class-IV employee (Watchman) in District Raipur and he has been transferred to Kanker, which is 160 Kms. away from his present place of posting. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is Class-IV employee and he is transferred to a distant place. This aspect may be considered by the transferring authority whether petitioner could be adjusted or transferred to nearby station. He further submits that the petitioner has already

made a representation before the competent authority and direction be given to decide the same as early as possible.

3.

It is directed that the representation of the petitioner shall consider and decide within a period of four weeks from today. While considering representation, it shall be kept in view that the petitioner is lowest rank employee and his children are studying in various schools. 4.

With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands finally disposed off. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Tiwari