← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3979/2014allowed

Ram Prakash Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

2015-09-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(S) No. 3979 of 2014 Ram Prakash Shau, S/o Shri Ghanshyam Prasad Sahu, Posted as Patwari in Dharsinwa, P.S. Dharsinwa, Tehsil & District Raipur, C.G. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh trough the Secretary, Department of Revenue & Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur C.G.

2. Collector, P.S. Civil Line, Raipur, C.G.

3. Tahsildar, Tehsil Raipur, Distt. Raipur, C.G.

4. Tahsildar, Tehsil Abhanpur, Distt. Raipur, C.G. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Jitendra Pali, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri B. Gopa Kumar, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 18/09/2015 Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 31.07.2014 Annexure P-1 whereby the Government has cancelled the previous transfer order of the petitioner dated 14.07.2014. 2.

According to the counsel for the petitioner, the earlier order dated 14.07.2014 transferring the petitioner from Abhanpur, District Raipur to Dharsinwa, District Raipur has already been acted upon and by virtue of an interim protection granted by this Court on 07.08.2014, the petitioner continues to discharge his duties at the place where he was transferred by the earlier order dated 14.07.2014. He further makes a submission that the dispute in the present writ petition is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in W.P.(S) No.1015 dated 16.07.2015 and prays that the present writ petition also can be disposed of in similar terms.

3.

On due verification of the facts of the said order passed in W.P.(S) No. 1015 of 2015, the State counsel submits that the present petition is also squarely covered by the said order.

4.

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 31.07.2014 is quashed. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the respondents to pass fresh order depending upon the administrative exigency, in accordance with the transfer policy.

5.

As a sequel, the writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Bhola