Ishwar Singh Kawachi v. State Of Achhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 3883 of 2018 Ishwar Singh Kawachi S/o Brijlal Kawachi, Aged About 34 Years, Presently Posted As Dy. Range Officer At Dy. Range Mari, Range Keshkal, Forest Division Keshkal, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Principal, Conservator Of Forest, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Conservator Of Forest, Kanker, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

4. Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Keshkal, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

5. Forest Range Officer, Keshkal, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate For State :

Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 13/12/2018 The grievance of the petitioner in this case is that the petitioner was transferred from Forest Division, Kanker to the Office of Deputy Forest Range, Mari vide order dated 14.08.2017. The petitioner gave his joining on 03.10.2017. Though the petitioner has given his joining on 03.10.2017, the petitioner till date has not been given the charge of Dy. Forest Range Officer which he otherwise is entitled for and the post on which he has been transferred.

2.

Contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that though respondent no.4 has issued necessary instructions to respondent no.5, till date the

order has not been physically executed in as much as the charge has not been handed over to the petitioner.

3.

Given the nature of dispute, this Court does not intend to keep the petition pending, rather ends of justice would meet if the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 3 & 4 to ensure that the petitioner is provided with the charge against the post on which he has been transferred in its letter and spirit. In case if respondent no.5 is putting hindrance in the implementation of the order, respondent no.3 should ensure suitable action to be taken for disobedience of the order of superiors. Let this exercise be completed by respondent no.3 and 4 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 4.

Needless to mention that respondent no.3 while complying with the order of this Court would ensure whether there is any litigation pending with an interim protection in favour of respondent no.5. 5.

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