Santosh Kumar Darve v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 7002 of 2017 • Santosh Kumar Darve S/o Shri Ramadhar Darve Aged About 41 Years Occupation Sahayak Shikashak Panchayat, Unnat Govt Primary School Bandhwapara Kaudiya Sankul Darrabhatha, R/o Village Bandhwapara, Kaudiya Police Station Seepat, Block Masturi, Police Station Seepat, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat, Gramin Vikas Vibhag, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Sanchalak, Panchayat Sanchalnalay Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

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

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

5. Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

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

7. Block Education Officer, Office Block Education Officer Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner Shri Rajendra Kumar Patel, Advocate.

For Respondents/State Shri Rajendra Tripathi, P.L.

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

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

Bandhwapara Kodiya to Primary School, Bineka.

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 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