Prafull Tiwari v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS. No. 7144 OF 2019 Prafull Tiwari S/o Shri Dinesh Tiwari Aged About 40 Years Working On The Post Of Driver In The Office Chhattisgarh State Antyavasai Cooperative Finance And Development Corporation Ltd. Atal Nagar, Sector 27, Housing Board Premises, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Schedule Caste And Schedule Tribes Department, Ministry At Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Antyavasai Cooperative Finance And Development, Corporation Ltd. Atal Nagar, Sector - 27, Housing Board Premises, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Naveen Kumar Bhagat Osd To Honble Minister School Education Schedule Caste And Schedule Tribes Development Minority Welfare Cooperative Department Ministry At Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Ajay Soni Working On The Post Of Personal Assisntant Orf Honble Minister School Education, Schedule Tribes Development Minority Welfare, Cooperative Department,l Ministry At Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

5. Nand Kumar Parmar Working On The Post Of Driver Chhattisgarh State Antyavasai Cooperative Finance And Development Corporation Ltd. Atal Nagar, Sector - 27, Housing Board Premises Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Mr. Jai Prakash Shukla, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 :

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 07.08.2019 whereby the respondent No. 4 is said to have passed an order (Annexure P-1) directing the authorities for passing Respondent No. 5 in place of the petitioner for Driver Vehicle of the chairman of the Chhattisgarh State Antyavasai Co-operative Finance and Development Corporation Ltd.

2. This Court is of the opinion that the said impugned action can not be brought within the scope of judicial review under Article 226 for the simple reason that the substantive service condition of the petitioner is not in any manner adversely effected. The petitioner has right for approaching the competent authority in the department for ventilating his grievances, if any. Such pity nature of change of posting is not one which should be entertained under the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.

3. The writ petition thus fails and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha