Smt. Purnima Patre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6352 of 2017 • Smt. Purnima Patre, W/o Shri Sushant Patre, Aged About 29 Years, Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School, Ghuru, Sankul Sakri, Block Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Janpad Panchayat Bilaspur Through Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Block Education Officer, Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Smt. Purnmia Koshle Assistant Teacher Panchayat, Primary School, Harijan Para, Ghutku, Block Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner Shri Akash Pandey, Advocate For Respondent-State Shri Rajendra Tripathi, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 23/11/2017 1.

Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 26.09.2017, by which the petitioner has been transferred from Government Primary School Ghuru to Primary School Nagoi on the ground of administrative exigency.

2.

The ground raised by the petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed in contravention of the circular dated

30.08.2017 and as such the same is in violation of the transfer policy issued by the State Government.

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 4 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 Nirala