High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/6814/2019disposed off

Sandeep Kumar Gorla v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-08-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6814 of 2019 Sandeep Kumar Gorla S/o - Late Ramaiya Gorla Aged About 32 Years Working As Rural Agriculture Extension Officer, Jagdalpur And District Bastar At Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Agriculture And BioTechnology, Department Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattsgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Dy. Director. Agrictulture, Jagdalpur, District Batar At Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

3. Sub-Division Officer, (Agriculture), Jagdalpur District Bastar At Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate For State :

Mr. P. Acharya, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 30.08.2019

1. The challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the order Annexure P1 dated 22.08.2019, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Jagdalpur to Dantewada.

2. The challenge of the present petitioner is on the ground that the petitioner is being transferred from one scheduled Area to another scheduled Area. The contention of the petitioner is that for the last 7 years the petitioner has been working in a scheduled area and as per the transfer policy of the State Government, he should not had been transferred to another scheduled area but instead the

-2respondents infact transferred him to a far more remote area which is a core scheduled area. Which is in violation of the transfer policy of the State Government.

3. Given the fact, let petitioner make a detailed representation to the respondents within a period of 10 days from today and on receipt of the representation, the respondents shall take a decision within a period of 30 days considering the policy of the State Government is concerned. While considering the same the State authority would also consider the policy of the State Government dated 03.06.2015.

4. Till the representation of the petitioner is decided, the effect and operation of the impugned order Annexure P-1 shall remain stayed so far as the petitioner is concerned.

5. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit