High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4019/2017disposed off

Dr. Surendra Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-08-28Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 4019 of 2017 Dr. Surendra Yadav S/o Late Shri B.P. Yadav, Aged About 55 Years Occupation Service Professor (Political Science) Govenrment Bilasa Girls College, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. Thana Civil Lines, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Anand Yadav, Occupation Service Assistant Professor (Political Science), Government M.M.R. P.G. College Champa, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate For State :

Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 28/08/2017 Heard.

1. The transfer order is under challenge mainly on the ground that the petitioner has remained posted at the present place of posting since 1 1⁄2 years and under the existing policy, normal period of stay at one station is two years and the petitioner has been subjected to transfer even without completion of two years.

2. Learned State counsel draws attention of this Court that the transfer policy for the present year vide corrigendum dated 24.07.2017 by which the normal tenure of service is only one year.

3. As the policy is not under challenge by this Cour, it cannot be said to be a case of violation of policy. It is also found that respondent No.2 was transferred in place of the petitioner and the petitioner is being transferred only to malafide accommodate respondent No.2. The place where the petitioner is being

transferred is not too far away from Bilaspur. There are no other difficulties of personal nature so as to say that for that reason, shifting of the petitioner within such a short period results in acute and severe hardship warranting interference. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this petition. However, considering that there exits a provision for consideration of representation, if the petitioner prefers representation, the same shall be considered and decided within four weeks from the date of receipt of representation along with copy of this order.

4. The petition is accordingly disposed off.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Rekha