Ramkhelawan Ravi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4717 of 2021 Ramkhelawan Ravi S/o Shri Ramdev Ram Aged About 49 Years Occupation Secretary Of Gram Panchayat Pachawal, Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Director Panchayat Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Collector Balrampur Ramanujganj, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

3. The Chief Executive Officer Jila Panchayat, Balrampur Ramanujganj, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

4. The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

5. Shri Ashok Gupta Secretary Gram Panchayat, Dindo, Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. D. N. Prajapati, Advocate.

For State :

Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. AG For Res. No.5 :

Mr. Rakesh Pandey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 02/09/2021

1. The grievance of the petitioner seems to be the impugned order Annexure P-1 dated 05.06.2021 whereby the services of the petitioner is shifted from Gram Panchayat, Pachawal under Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur to Gram Panchayat Dindo, Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur, Disrict Balrampur-Ramanujganj.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is only recently that petitioner was shifted to this place and he has assumed his duties vide the order

-2Annexure P-2 dated 09.04.2021, in less than two months time, the petitioner has again been shifted vide Annexuer P-1 dated 05.06.2021.

3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.5 submits that the order passed by the respondents have already been acted upon in as much as the petitioner has handed over the charge to the respondent no.5.

4. Be that as it may, since it is case of transfer which has been done by the respondent no.3 the grievance of the parties can be best redressed if the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the respondent no.3 in this regard.

5. Subject to the petitioner making a fresh representation if he has not made any, within a period of seven days from today, the respondent no.3 in turn is directed to decide the representation within a further period of 60 days from the date of receipt of representation.

6. Meanwhile, purely as an interim measure, till the representation of the petitioner is decided, let status quo as it exists today i.e. on 02.09.2021 be maintained.

7.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit