High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2742/2015disposed off

Jagat Narayan Mishra v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-07-17Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2742 of 2015 Jagat Narayan Mishra S/o Late Shri Ramlochan Mishra, Aged About 53 Years R/o Shree Smriti Bhavan, Seepat Road, New Sarkanda, Bilsapur, District-Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Sc/st Development, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Post Office & Police Station Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Chief Election Officer, D.K.S. Bhavan, Old Mantralaya, Raipur, District-Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. District Election Officer, Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh)

4. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development Department, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)

5. District Collector, Bilaspur District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

6. Additional Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

7. Deputy Election Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

8. Secretary, Schedule Tribes, Schedule Caste, Obc, Minority Welfare Department, New Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

9. Shri Neelkanth Tekam, Additional Collector And Deputy Election Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 10.Shri C. L. Jaiswal, The Then Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Bilaspur, Presently Working As Assistant, Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)

...Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Advocate For State : Mr. Manish Nigam, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board

17/07/2017 Heard.

1. This case was earlier referred to Lok Adalat. But the matter could not be settled, therefore, it is listed for hearing before the Court.

2. The petitioner, by this petition is challenging transfer order passed 05.12.2013. This Court passed an interim order staying the operation of transfer order on 10.08.2015 which is still continuing.

3. Learned State counsel submits that at this stage, the respondents may be granted liberty to pass fresh order as may be considered necessary in the exigency of service.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not oppose.

5. The transfer order which has remained in abeyance because of the interim order shall no longer be given effect to. The respondents, however, are at liberty to pass fresh order as may be necessary in the administrative exigency in service.

6. As far as salary aspect is concerned, as the petitioner is continuing by interim order, the respondent shall consider and pass appropriate order and also provide salary for the entire period during which he has continued by an interim order. The petition at this stage is disposed off with liberty to prefer separate representation in respect of claim of salary for the period prior to interim order.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Rekha