High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/7142/2019rejected

Manesh Kuamr Verma (Ranger) v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-09-11Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS. No. 7142 OF 2019 Manesh Kuamr Verma (Ranger) S/o Late Shri Tayaram Verma Aged About 37 Years Working As Assistant Range Officer, Sub Range Dadargarh, Forest Range Office Keshkal, Tehsil Keshkal, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest, Mantralaya, Mahanandi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Forest Range Officer Keshkal (General), Keshkal, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh

3. Shri Satish Kumar Dhruv (Ranger) Working At Keshkal Forest Range, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ---Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Mr. Shantam Awasthi, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 :

Mr. Kishore Narayan, Adv.

For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 11.09.2019

1. The Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order (Annexure P-1) dated 23.08.2019 whereby the respondent No. 3 has been sent as Assistant Range Officer for Forest Division.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that it was the petitioner who was holding the charge and the impugned order does not show the transfer of the petitioner and therefore the petitioner is not aware as to where the petitioner has to work after the respondent No. 3 takes charge from the petitioner.

3. Perusal of the records with the writ petition would show that the petitioner was only given charge of Special Squad Range on the retirement of the previous Deputy Ranger Shri Shivlal Kamro and the petitioner substantially is a Forest Range Officer Keshkal that is

the substantive place of posting of the petitioner. Pursuant to the respondent No. 3 taking charge, the petitioner as a natural consequence remains posted substantially in Keshkal as a Range Officer.

4. This Court does not find any good reason for interfering with the impugned order Annexure P-1. Given facts of the circumstances of the case, the writ petition therefore fails and is accordingly rejected. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha