← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/8519/2019disposed off

Rajesh Ku Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-10-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 8519 of 2019 Rajesh Ku Patel S/o Shri Late Ramsharan Patel Aged About 40 Years Currently Posted As Training Officer, Language English, Posted At I.T.I. Korba, R/o- Pali, Bazar Para, Above Post-Office, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Of Department Of Skill Development, Technical Education And Employment Department, Chhattisgarh Rajya Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan P.S.- Mandir-Hasaud, Naya-Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Principal of I.T.I. Korba District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. ----Respondents For petitioner - Shri Pallav Mishra, Advocate. For State-Shri Alok Bakshi, Addl. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 18/10/2019 1.

Grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has made a request for transfer from Korba to Pali which is 30 kms, however the petitioner has been transferred to Bilha which is 125 kms and that too with remark of his own expense. It is stated whereas the petitioner has sought for transfer to Pali then in such case he could not have been transferred on his own expense to other place at Bilha. It is further stated that the petitioner has made different representation which are pending adjudication, same may be decided and transfer made may not be given effect to. 2.

Perusal of the transfer order shows that the petitioner has been transferred from Korba to Bilha on his own expense. Representation which is placed on record shows that the petitioner requested for transfer to Pali and transfer order would reflect that he has been transferred on his own expense. Then certainly if place of posting is not accorded according to the wish it cannot be stated that the petitioner could have been

transferred on his own expense. Perusal of the documents shows that several representations have been made which are pending adjudication. Considering the same, respondent No.1 may decide the representation of the petitioner within a further period of 60 days. It is directed that if transfer order dated 20/08/2019 in respect of the petitioner has not been given effect to till date, same may not be given effect to till representation is decided on merits.

3.

With such observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE gouri