High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2560/2015disposed off

Bhisham Das Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-09-22Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2560 of 2015 Bhisham Das Sahu S/o Late Bhavdas Sahu Aged About 55 Years R/o Ward No. 58, Urla, Police Station Pulgaon Nagar, Mohan Nagar, Durg, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Technical Education Main Power Employment, Science And Technology Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. Joint Director Industrial Training Instituted Regional Office, Bastar Division Bastar, District Bastar, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Superintendent Industrial Training Institute, Durg, District Durg, (Chhattisgarh)

4. Superintendent, Industrial Training Institute Bijapur, District Bijapur, (Chhattisgarh)

5. A.K. Tembhekar, Training Superintendent, Industrial Training Institute, Durg, District Durg, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Smt. Meera Jaiswal, Advocate For Res. No. 1 to 4 :

Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer For Res. No.5 :

Shri Govind Dewangan, Advocate S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 22/09/2017 Heard.

1. The petitioner had earlier challenged order dated 6.7.2015 by which earlier transfer order dated 10.7.2014 was amended, though after execution of transfer order dated 10.7.2014. This Court stayed effect and operation of the order dated 6.7.2015 on 17.7.2015.

2. During the pendency of that petition, now a fresh order of transfer has been

-2passed on 14.8.2017 against the petitioner which has been brought on record along with an application for staying effect and operation of order dated 14.8.2017.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of this petition, fresh transfer order could not be passed.

4. Earlier order and modification was prima facie found to be bad because the petitioner had already executed transfer order dated 10.7.2014. That order was stayed and the petitioner continued at the present place of posting. Now a fresh order of transfer was passed. Therefore, in these circumstance, the present petition is rendered infructuous and is disposed off.

5. If the petitioner has any other ground to challenge the validity of order dated 14.8.2017, he would be at liberty do so.

Sd/-/-/--/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen