High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/6436/2017disposed off

Pramod Kumar Kirti v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-11-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6436 of 2017 • Pramod Kumar Kirti, S/o Shri Malikram Kirti, aged about 29 years, Occupation Assistant Teacher, Panchayat, Govt. Primary School, Mohatara, R/o Village Mohtara, Block Masturi, P.S. Masturi, District Bilaspur (CG) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur (CG)

2. Director, Panchayat, Directorate, Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur (CG)

3. C.E.O., Zila Panchayat Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)

4. C.E.O., Janpad Panchayat, Masturi, District Masturi (CG)

5. Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)

6. District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)

7. Block Education Officer, Office of Block Education Officer, Masturi, District Bilaspur (CG) ---- Respondent For Petitioner : Shri Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Shri Rajendra Tripathi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 30/11/2017

1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 13.11.2017, by which the petitioner has been transferred from Primary School, Mohtara to Primary School, Pataideeh.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that for the present the petitioner may be allowed to make a representation and the concerned authority of the respondent may be directed to decide the same, in accordance with law.

3. Considering the entire fact 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 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) Barve