Arjun Singh Kashyap v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5013 of 2018 Arjun Singh Kashyap S/o Late Panduram Kasyap, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Karndola Bhanpuri, Post. Police Station Bhanpuri, Tahsil and District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Forest Department, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. The D.F.O. Forest Circle Bastar, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh
3. The S.D.O. (Forest) Forest Circle Bastar, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh
4. Circle Forest Officer, Forest Circle Bastar, Jagdalpur, DistrictBastar, Chhattisgarh
5. Murli Singh Manjhi, Deputy Ranger, Forest Circle Bastar, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :
Shri Vikash Shrivastava, Advocate For State :
Shri S. P. Kale, Dy. A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 07.08.2018 The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P-1 dated 04.07.2018 wherein because of the unsatisfactory performance of his duty, the respondent no.2 has withdrawn the charge which was earlier given to the petitioner and has posted him in the special duties. 2.
This order is being given a picture of an order of attachment by the petitioner while assailing the order in the present writ petition.
3.
Perusal of the order by itself is very specific that the petitioner while working as a Deputy Forest Ranger at Ghotia circle, he has not been able to perform his duties to the expectation of the higher authorities and it is for this reason that the charge has been handed over to a different person and the petitioner for the time being has been posted in the special duty. 4.
The said impugned order cannot be said to be an order of attachment. It is only an administrative arrangement made by respondent no.2 in the administrative exigency. By the impugned order the petitioner's rights or privileges would not get hampered and infringed in any manner neither is there any reduction in any of the benefits which the petitioner has been receiving till date. Under the circumstances this Court does not find any strong ground for interfering with the impugned order. 5.
The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Bhola