Deepak Kumar Dey v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5238 of 2018 Deepak Kumar Dey S/o Late Shri Shiv Kumar Dey, Aged About 53 Years, R/o House No. 18, R. S. Colony, Kanker, Tahsil and Police Station Kanker, District- South Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Veterinary Services, New Raipur, Disrtict- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Deputy Director, Veterinary Services Kanker, District- South Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh

4. Deputy Director, Veterinary Services Narayanpur, DistrictNarayanpur, Chhattisgarh

5. Collector, Kanker, District- South Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri C. R. Sahu, Advocate For State :

Shri Ratan Pusty, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 21.08.2018 Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P-1 dated 07.07.2018 whereby the service of the petitioner has been transferred from the office of Deputy Director, Veterinary Services, Kanker to Narayanpur where a new veterinary service office has been established. 2.

Considering the fact that there are specific reasons assigned for the

change of place of posting of the petitioner by the authority concerned and the reasons seem to be fair and justified, this Court does not find any strong case made out by the petitioner for interfering with the impugned order of transfer.

3.

At this juncture, counsel for the petitioner makes two submissions; firstly the petitioner though has been posted at Narayanpur but he has not been given joining there. This appears to be a serious. The concerned authority in particular respondent no.4 shall ensure that if there is an order of transfer in favour of the petitioner and he has been relieved from the present place of posting, he should definitely be given joining. The second contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that though substantively the petitioner is a driver but because of his loss of vision of his eyes he has been granted table work at Kanker and therefore, he may further be given table work at the new place of posting. This request of the petitioner also has to be considered on the administrative side by respondent no.4. Let the petitioner make a representation in this regard to respondent no.4 who in turn shall consider the same sympathetically. 4.

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Bhola