High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/6416/2017disposed off

Sharwan Kumar Salam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-12-04Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6416 of 2017 • Sharwan Kumar Salam S/o Milan Ram Salam Aged About 47 Years R/o Vanpal (Deputy Ranger) Mari Region, Keshkaal District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Principle Secretary Forest Department Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. District Forest Officer, Keshkaal District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

3. Ishwar Singh Kawachi Vanpal (Deputy Ranger) Mari Keshkaal Area District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Petitioner : Shri Anurag Jha, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Shri Adhiraj Surana, Deputy Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 04/12/2017

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that by order dated 6.7.2017 passed by the Forest Range Officer, Keshkal Range, District Kondagaon, the petitioner was posted as Range Assistant, Mari. However, by order dated 14th August, 2017 passed by the State Government, respondent No.3 Ishwar Singh Kawachi has been posted at Mari presumably for lack of information about the vacancy.

2. Learned counsel would further submit that for the present the petitioner may be allowed to make a representation and the concerned authority of the respondent may be directed to decide the same, in accordance with law.

3. Considering the entire fact situation of the case, it would be appropriate to allow the petitioner to prefer a representation before the concerned competent authority raising his grievance against the impugned transfer order.

4. Let the petitioner prefer representation within a period of 4 weeks from today and thereafter, the concerned competent authority shall consider and decide the same within next 8 weeks, in accordance with law and on its own merits.

5. For a period of 12 weeks or till the representation is decided, whichever is earlier, the status quo, as it exists today, in respect of the petitioner's posting, shall be maintained.

6. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall decide the matter, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, without treating any observation made in this order, as opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Barve