High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3721/2021disposed off

Manoj Kumar Dhakad v. Union Of India

2021-07-20Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3721 of 2021

1. Manoj Kumar Dhakad S/o Gend Lal Dhakad Aged About 46 Years Caste Kirad, R/o Village A. No. A - 10, Cist Colony Near Police Chouki, Old Sinema Hall, Ward No. 8, Korea Colleary, Chirmiri, District Korea Chhattisgarh., District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Union Of India Through Its Secretary Home Ministry, Of India New Delhi, District : New Delhi, Delhi

2. Inspector General Of Police Central Industrial Security Force, Central Zone Headquarter Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh

3. Assistant Commandant / Administration Central Industrial Security Force Central Zone Headquarter Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate.

For Union of India : Shri Amit Banerjee, Adv., on behalf of Shri Ramakant Mishra, Asstt. S.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 20/07/2021

1. The petitioner seems to have been aggrieved of the order of transfer dated 30.04.2021 transferring the petitioner from Korea to Dantewada from the project of SECL to the Project of NMDC.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has already tendered his application for voluntarily retirement that is pending consideration before the authorities and therefore transferring the petitioner at this juncture would be putting him to great inconvenience and difficulties.

3. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has already made a representation in this regard to the respondents on

-209.05.2021 and the same shall be decided at the earliest in accordance with law. .

4. Given the said fact that the representation of the petitioner is pending consideration before the authorities concerned i.e. the respondent No. 2, the writ petition at this juncture is disposed of directing the respondent No. 2 to take appropriate decision at the earliest taking into consideration the contentions that the petitioner has raised in his representation. In addition the petitioner would also be at liberty to make a fresh representation to the respondent No. 2 in this regard. The respondent-authority is expected to take a decision at the earliest preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge J-