Ravindra Dewangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 7139 of 2017 • Ravindra Dewangan S/o Late Shri Daya Shankar Dewangan Aged About 54 Years Post Accountant, R/o Pathragudapara, Bhagat Sing Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribe Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Commissioner, Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribe Development Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh.

4. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development , Narayanpur, District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner Shri A. K. Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent-State Shri Adhiraj Surana, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 14/12/2017 1.

Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 14.08.2017, by which the petitioner has been transferred from Bastar to Narayanpur on the ground of administrative exigency. 2.

The ground raised by the petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed without any administrative exigency 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