Ramesh Kumar Kamar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2244 of 2019 Ramesh Kumar Kamar S/o Late Shri Sitaram Kamar, Aged About 50 Years, Occupation Nayab Tahsildar Mungeli, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Post Office Mantralaya, P.S. Rakhi, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Under Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Post Office Mantralaya, P. S. Rakhi, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The District Collector, Mungeli, Collectorate Building, District - Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner :

Shri Vipin Tiwari, Advocate For State :

Ms. Shriya Mishra, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 28.03.2019 1.

The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P-1 dated 20.02.2019 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from District Mungeli to District Balrampur.

2.

The challenge to the order of transfer is on the ground that the petitioner has been subjected to frequent transfer. According to the

petitioner, prior to the petitioner being posted at Mungeli he was posted at Rajnadgaon and only vide order dated 31.08.2018 he was transferred from Rajnandgaon to Mungeli and as such the petitioner has worked at Mungeli for a period of less than 7 months. Earlier also the petitioner had worked at Rajnandgaon only for a period of one month, vide order dated 31.07.2018 when the petitioner was transferred from Bilaspur to Rajnandgaon. According to the petitioner, in less than 8 months time, the petitioner has been subjected to 3 transfers which clearly brings the case of the petitioner under a case of frequent transfer.

3.

Given the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner make a detailed representation to respondent no.1 within a period of 15 days from today and respondent no.1 in turn shall consider the entire contents that the petitioner would raise in the representation and decide the same within a further period of 30 days from the date of receipt of representation of the petitioner. Till the representation of the petitioner is decided, the effect and operation of the impugned order so far as the petitioner is concerned shall remain stayed.

4.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai