Smt. Santoshi Pendro v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 6694 of 2019 Smt. Santoshi Pendro W/o - Shri Shiv Kumar Pendro, Aged About 34 Years, R/o - Gram Ramhepur, Lormi, Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Collector, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh

3. Government High School Dholgi, Through Principal, Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh

4. Mangal Singh Porte, Government Higher Secondary School, Godkhamhi, Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate For State :

Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 02.09.2019

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order of transfer dated 12.07.2019 Annexure P-1 passed by the respondents transferring the petitioner from Govt. High School, Dholgi, Block Lormi, District Mungeli to Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhalapur, Block and District Mungeli. The challenge is also to the order Annexure-2 dated 21.08.2019 whereby the

petitioner has been transferred from Govt. High School, Dholgi, District Mungeli to Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhalapur, District Mungeli.

2. The challenge to the transfer orders is on the ground that the impugned orders reflect the transfer of the petitioner to have been made at the request of the petitioner.

3. According to counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has never moved any application nor has requested for any order of transfer, yet the authorities have shown the order of transfer to have been on its own cost.

4. Given the limited grievance that the petitioner has raised challenging the order of transfer, this Court is of the opinion that subject to verification of the fact whether the petitioner has made a request for transfer, the impugned order so far as the petitioner is concerned, shall not be given effect to. However, on verification if it is found that the petitioner has in fact made a request, then the impugned orders would not stand interfered and the respondents would be at liberty to relieve the petitioner from the present place of posting. Meanwhile, till the verification is done, the effect and operation of the impugned orders, so far as the petitioner is concerned, shall not be given effect to.

5. The present Writ Petition, accordingly stands disposed off. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai