← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/8173/2019disposed off

Tejeshwar Prasad Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-10-01Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8173 of 2019 Tejeshwar Prasad Yadav S/o Punni Lal Yadav Aged About 40 Years Presently Posted And Working As Assistant Development And Extension Officer At Janpad Panchayat Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 01/10/2019

1. The challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the order Annexure P/1 dated 22.08.2019 whereby the services of the petitioner has been transferred from Janpad Panchayat Masturi, District Bilaspur to Janpad Panchayat Korba, District Korba.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that at the present place of posting the petitioner has been working only since August, 2017 and in less than about 2 years of time, the petitioner has again been shifted to another place. Further contention of the petitioner is that wife of the petitioner is also working at district Bilaspur and as per the transfer policy of the State Government of the State Government, the husband and wife should be posted at the same place or nearby place.

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

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

5. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved