Nandu Soni v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4565 of 2018 Nandu Soni S/o Late Lakhpati Soni, Aged About 55 Years R/o Shitla Colony, Pandri Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Co - Operative Department Mahanadi Bhavan Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Secretary Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Vipnan Sangh Maryadit Raipur

3. Managing Director Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Vipnan Sangh Maryadit Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Chief Accountant Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Vipnan Sangh Maryadit Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ----Respondents For Petitioner :

Ms. Smita Jha, Advocate For State :

Mr. Dheeraj Wankhede, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 24/08/2018

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order of transfer (Annexure P/1) dated 26.05.2018, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Raipur to Bijapur by the respondent No.2.

2. Contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a class-IV low paid employee and that he has been transferred to a very faraway place and by executing the order of transfer, the petitioner and his family would be put to irreparable inconvenience and loss.

3. The State counsel submits that the impugned order has been passed by the respondent No.2.

4. Considering the fact that the order of transfer had been issued by the respondent No.2 and undisputedly the petitioner is a low paid

class-IV employee, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the respondents within a period of 15 days, in addition to the representation (Annexure P/6) which he has already made. That on such representation being made, the respondent No.2 shall pass an order afresh within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation.

5. Meanwhile, the respondent No.2 is ordered not to initiate any coercive step against the petitioner with regard to the impugned order (Annexure P/1).

6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved