Narendra Kumar Karsh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 7158 of 2017 • Narendra Kumar Karsh S/o Shri Reshamlal Karsh Aged About 32 Years Occupation Assistant Teacher(Panchayat), Primary School Kukda, Sankul Khamhariya, R/o Village Kukda, Thana Masturi, Block Masturi, Thana Seepat, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Gramin Vikash Vibhag, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director, Directorate, Chhattisgarh Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Executive Officer, District Panchayat Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

5. The Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

6. District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

7. Block Education Officer, Block Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Petitioner Shri Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate.

For Respondents/State Shri Sameer Behar, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 14/12/2017

1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 13.11.2017 by which he has been transferred from Primary School, Kookda to Primary School, Rehtator.

2. Ground raised by the petitioner is that the impugned transfer order has been passed in an illegal and arbitrary manner and the authorities without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case in its true perspective the petitioner has been declared as surplus.

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