High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/7025/2019disposed off

Anand Kumar Xaxa v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-09-03Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 7025 of 2019 Anand Kumar Xaxa S/o Ernest Xaxa Aged About 45 Years, Working As Rural Agriculture Extension Officer, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Agriculture Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Agriculture, Directorate, Agricultutre, Vikas Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Joint Director Agriculture, Division Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For State :

Mr. P. Acharya, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 03.09.2019

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P-1 dated 22.08.2019 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Block Ambikapur, District Surguja to Block Shankargarh, District Balrampur.

2. The ground of challenge is that the petitioner had undergone a major Neuro operation in the year 2013 on account of an accidental injury.

Subsequently, the petitioner has been advised not to travel long duration. The second ground of challenge is that the wife of the petitioner is a Govt. employee under the Panchayat Department working at Zila Panchayat Surguja, Ambikapur. Under the circumstances, as far as possible husband and wife should have been retained at the same place as per the transfer policy of the State.

3. Given the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner make a detailed representation to the respondents within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the respondents in turn shall consider the same within a further period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the representation.

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

5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai