High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2654/2015disposed off

Mansaram Dadsena v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2015-09-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2654 of 2015

1. Mansaram Dadsena S/o Jagmuram Dadsena Aged About 59 Years R/o. Ramhepur, High School Mungeli, P.S. & Post Mungeli, Civil And Revenue District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through : Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Director, Ayurved Yog And Prakritik Chikitsa Unani Siddha Avam Homeopathy Ayurved Department, Chhattisgarh Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. District Ayurved Officer Kabirdham, Civil & Revenue District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondent For Petitioner Shri Manoj Paranjape & Shri Vikram Dixit, Advocates For Respondent/State Shri Majid Ali, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 15/09/2015 Heard.

(2) Challenge in this petition is to the impugned order dated 30-6-2014 (Annexure P/1), whereby, the petitioner has been transferred from Kabeerdham to Bastar.

(3) According to the learned counsel for the State, the petitioner has already been relieved to join at the transferred place of posting. (4) At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation before the respondent authorities raising his grievances in respect of his transfer. (5) No objection from the other side.

(6) Looking to the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make a representation before the respondent authorities within a period of one month and thereafter, the competent authorities is directed to consider and decide his representation in accordance with law, expeditiously. (7) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law on its own merits. Sd/- J u d g e (Prashant Kumar Mishra)