High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/10862/2019disposed off

Rajendra Singh Rajput v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-01-07Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 10862 of 2019 • Rajendra Singh Rajput S/o Late Shri Makrand Singh Rajput Aged About 43 Years Constable, G.D. R/o Madarteresa Ward Police Station Bodhghat District Bastar Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home / Police, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director General Of Police Police Head Quarter, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Additional Director General Of Police (Guptawarta / Prashasan), Police Head Quarter, Naya Raipur District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Inspector General Of Police Bastar Range, Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

5. Deputy Inspector General Of Police Aasuchana Shakha, Police Head Quarter, Raipur , District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

6. Superintendent Of Police Bastar Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

7. Superintendent Of Police Vishesh Aasuchna Shakha Jagdalpur District Bastar, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate For Respondents/ State :

Ms. Akanksha Jain, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 07/01/2020

1. Heard.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed at M.T Pool Raipur, and on his own request he was posted as Driver at Baster by order dated 14.09.2005. Subsequently, the petitioner by order dated 12.12.2019 has been repatriated back to his original place of posting i.e. at M.T. Pool Raipur.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner's original posting was made in 2005 after a period of 14 years the repatriation of the petitioner to M.T Pool Raipur will affect his right and seniority. He further submits that the petitioner may be permitted to file a representation before Respondent No. 2 for redressal of his grievance and direction may be issued to decide the same expeditiously.

4. The prayer appears to be fair. In view of such prayer, the petitioner is allowed to make a representation before Respondent No.2 within 10 days from today and Respondent No. 2 shall consider and decide the same within a further period of 45 days from the date of receipt a copy of this order.

5. Till then, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners with regard to the subject matter.

6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Jyoti