Sanjay Kumar Thakur v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4120 of 2021 Sanjay Kumar Thakur S/o Shri Sher Singh Thakur, Aged About 48 Years, Presently Posted And Working As Food Inspector, Food Section, Office Of Collector, Baloda Bazaar- Bhatapara, DistrictBaloda Bazaar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director, Food And Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Collector, Baloda Bazar, District- Baloda Bazaar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate For State :

Mr. Ishan Verma, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 10.08.2021

1. Present is a repeat petition filed by the petitioner. The earlier writ petition was filed against the order of transfer dated 01.12.2020. This Court had refused to interfere with the same vide order dated 10.12.2020 passed in WPS No. 5160 of 2020. The order of this Court was subjected to challenge in Writ Appeal No. 7 of 2021. The Division Bench also declined to interfere in the writ appeal vide its order dated 15.01.2021. The only solace which the petitioner got was to prefer a

representation to the authorities. The petitioner seems to have preferred a representation on 24.03.2021. Annexure P-5 would reflect that the representation of petitioner is still pending consideration before the authority concerned. Meanwhile, the impugned order Annexure P-1 dated 22.07.2021 has been passed leading to the filing of the present writ petition.

2. Given the fact that this Court had already declined to interfere with the order of transfer, the issuance of Annexure P-1 which is a consequential order is also equally difficult to interfere with at this stage. However, it is made clear that since the representation of petitioner is pending, any decision taken by the respondents on the representation of petitioner consequences thereupon would decide the fate of the petitioner's place of posting. The respondent authorities are free to consider granting a different place of posting to the petitioner other than the place where he has been sent by the order of transfer dated 01.12.2020.

3. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Khatai