Ravindra Kumar Pathak v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4893 of 2021

1. Ravindra Kumar Pathak S/o Late C.L. Pathak Aged About 61 Years Working As Senior Agriculture Development Officer And Posted At Deputy Director Agriculture Department Korea, District Korea (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through- Its Secretary, Department Of Agriculture, Atal Nagar, New Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

2. Director Agriculture Department Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

3. Deputy Director Agriculture Department Korea, District- Korea (C.G.) ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Mirza Hafeez Baig, Advocate.

For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 14.09.2021.

1. The limited grievance that the Petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is for an appropriate direction to Respondents to consider his case for being transferred to his home district keeping in view the few months left for his retirement.

2. Transfer Policy of the State Government presently in vogue also has the Clause in this regard.

3. Given the said fact, this Court does not intend to keep the present Writ Petition pending, rather, ends of justice would meet if the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Respondents to consider and decide the representation of the Petitioner, within a period of 60 days, for being posted to his home district in the light of the Transfer Policy of the State Government and also taking note of the limited tenure of service that is left for the Petitioner for his superannuation.

-24. While deciding the claim of the Petitioner, the Transfer Policy alone may not be borne in mind by the authorities. The representation of the Petitioner may be considered on any other grounds including sympathetic grounds.

5. Considering the fact that the claim of the Petitioner has to be decided by Respondent No.2, the Respondent No.2 is directed to take a decision within the period stipulated by this Court as provided in paragraph 3 of this order.

6. Petitioner is also at liberty to file a fresh representation before Respondent No.2 in respect of his grievances. The authorities may consider the same also while deciding his grievances.

7. Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions/observations.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder