High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/6978/2019disposed off

Prasad Ram Paikra v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-09-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6978 of 2019 Prasad Ram Paikra S/o Shri Bitan Ram Aged About 53 Years R/o House No. 95, College Road, Amatoli, Tahsil - Sitapur, Police Station - Sitapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Under Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The District Education Officer, Ambikapur District - Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

3. The Block Education Officer, Sitapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Himanshu Sinha, Advocate For State :

Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05.09.2019

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure p1 dated 20.08.2019 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Sarguja to Raigarh.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that he is the District Secretary of the Chhattisgarh Pradesh Lipik Vargiya Shaskiya Karmachari Sangh. Therefore, he comes within the protected category.

3. Let this aspect be verified by respondent No. 1 through respondent No. 2 and thereafter if the petitioner has been found to be a genuine

-2office bearer, the representation which the petitioner would make within a period of 15 days from today shall be considered within a further period of 30 days.

4. In case, if it is found that petitioner is not the office bearer of the union, the authorities would be at liberty to initiate appropriate disciplinary action against the petitioner for using false and fake documents for the purpose of filing the writ petition before the High Court. The respondents will also consider the aspect that the petitioner is not being replaced by any other person, necessary steps in this regard should also be taken while representation is considered.

5. Till a decision is taken on the representation of the petitioner, the effect and operation of the impugned order so far as the petitioner is concerned shall remain stayed.

6. With the aforesaid observations, the present Writ Petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit