Narad Lal Vaidya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 8038 of 2019 Narad Lal Vaidya S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal Vaidya Aged About 61 Years Range Officer Dhaudai, Forest Division - Narayanpur, District - Kanker Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Under Secretary, Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. The Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division - Narayanpur, District - Kanker Chhattisgarh.

4. Shri Sukhlal Darro, Transferred to the Post Of Range Officer, Dhaudai, Forest Division, Narayanpur, District - Kanker Chhattisgarh. ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Jitendra Pali, Dy. Advocate General.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03.10.2019

1. Challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the order of transfer dated 23.08.2019 whereby the respondent No.4 has been transferred at the place where the petitioner has been working.

2. According to the petitioner, there is no order so far as disturbing the place of posting of the petitioner is concerned and he is working at the said place by way of a specific order in this regard since 31.07.2012 onwards. According to the petitioner, he has received instructions from his client that the State Govt. has passed a revised order of transfer again on 23.08.2019 now changing the place of transfer of the respondent No.4 from South Kondagaon to Bhopalpatnam. According to the petitioner now that the place of posting of the respondent No.4 stands modified, he

-2should go and report for duties at Bhopalpatnam, but he seems to have been insisting for the charge at the present place where the petitioner is working. The petitioner has got very short tenure of service left for his retirement and therefore at this juncture at would be not proper and appropriate for disturbing the petitioner.

3. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner inform the respondent No.1 in this regard and the respondent No.1 accordingly should take an appropriate steps in ensuring that the respondent No.4 is suitably accommodated without disturbing the present place of posting of the petitioner and an appropriate order in the administrative interest be passed at the earliest.

4. Till a decision is taken by the respondent No.1, let status quo as it exists today so far as posting of the petitioner is concerned be maintained.

5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder