High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/6351/2017disposed off

S. R. Meshram v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-11-27Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6351 of 2017 • S. R. Meshram S/o Sitaram Meshram, Aged About 49 Years Occupation Service, Presently Posted as a Rural Agriculture Extension Officer, Area, Ravelidih, Block Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. R/o Kosanagar, Ward No. 3, Bhilai Nagar, Durg, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Krishi Avam Jaiv Pradyhogiki, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Director, Agriculture, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Deputy Director, Agriculture, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

4. Collector, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Petitioner Shri Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate.

For Respondents Shri Rajendra Tripathi, P.L. for the State.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 27/11/2017

1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 14.08.2017 by which she has been transferred from the office of Senior Agriculture Development Officer Block Durg, District Durg (C.G.) to the office of Senior Agriculture Development Officer, Block : Gurur, District Balod (C.G.) on the ground of administrative exigency.

2. The ground raised by the petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed contrary to the transfer policy which categorically provides that the wife and husband should be posted at a particular place.

3. Considering the facts situation of the case, it would be appropriate to allow the petitioner to prefer a representation before the concerned competent authority raising his grievance against the impugned transfer order.

4. Let the petitioner prefer representation within a period of 04 weeks from today and thereafter, the concerned competent authority shall consider and decide the same within the next 8 weeks, in accordance with law and on its own merits.

5. For a period of 12 weeks or till the representation is decided, whichever is earlier, the status quo, as it exists today, in respect of the petitioner's posting, shall be maintained.

6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall decide the matter, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, without treating any observation made in this order, as opinion on the merits of the case.

Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Akhilesh