← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/5371/2020dismissed

Khadanand Patanwar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-12-16Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5371 of 2020 Khadanand Patanwar S/o Late Shri Rampyare Patanwar, Aged About 58 Years Working As Patwari At Halka No. 43, Ameri R.I. Circle Sakri, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

3. Sub Divisional Officer (Rev) Kota, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

4. Dhirendra Singh S/o Late Vishnu Singh Sahgal Gali Vidya Nagar Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Barun Kumar Chakraborty, Adv.

For State :

Mr. Rahul Mishra, Dy. G.A.

For Respondent No.4 :

Mr. Sachin Nidhi, Advocate along with Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 16/12/2020 1.

The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order of transfer, whereby the petitioner, who is working as a Patwari has been transferred from P.H. No. 43 Ameri Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur to P.H. No. 12 to Belpan, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur.

2.

The primary contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been transferred four times within a year and therefore the case falls under the category of frequent transfers. The order of transfer has been issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer under whom the

petitioner is discharging his duties and it is from one P.H. number to another P.H. number within the same Tehsil and the distance within the two itself is too short a distance.

3.

Considering the distance between the two places of posting, this Court does not find any strong case made out calling for an interference with the impugned order of transfer at this stag. The writ petition therefore being devoid order dated merit deserves to be and is accordingly rejected.

4.

Reluctant of this Court in entertaining the writ petition would not come in the way of the petitioner to approach the respondents by way of a representation ventilating his grievances in case if they have any personal inconveniences in the course of complying with the order of the transfer dated 28.11.2020.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved