Chhattisgarh High Court
WPS/10869/2019 of D.K. DASHABHRATAR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 24 December 2019
CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.10869 of 2019 D.K. Dashabhratar S/o Shri Karuna Dashabhratar, aged about 60 years, Occupation – Assistant Engineer e-t-i- ¼egkunh tyk'k; ifj;kstuk½ fMlusV Sub Division No.11, Bangoli, District Raipur, C.G. R/o Katora Talab Raipur,
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPURWrit Petition (S) No.10869 of 2019
NAFR
D.K. Dashabhratar S/o Shri Karuna Dashabhratar, aged about 60 years,Occupation – Assistant Engineer e-t-i- ¼egkunh tyk'k; ifj;kstuk½ fMlusVSub Division No.11, Bangoli, District Raipur, C.G. R/o Katora TalabRaipur, District Raipur C.G.
Versus
---- Petitioner
1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Water ResourcesDepartment, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur,District Raipur C.G.Department, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur,District Raipur C.G.
2. Engineer in Chief, Water Resources Department, Shivnath Bhawan, NewRaipur, District Raipur C.G. Raipur, District Raipur C.G.
3. Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi PariyojnaRaipur Chhattisgarh, Shahid Bhagat Singh Chowk, Civil Line ShankarNagar, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. Raipur Chhattisgarh, Shahid Bhagat Singh Chowk, Civil Line ShankarNagar, Raipur, District Raipur C.G.
4. Executive Engineer, Resources Department, e-t-i- ¼egkunh tyk'k;ifj;kstuk½ fMlusV Division No.3, Tilda, Raipur, District Raipur C.G.ifj;kstuk½ fMlusV Division No.3, Tilda, Raipur, District Raipur C.G.
---- Respondents
For Petitioner :Mr.Suresh Kumar Verma, Advocate For Respondents :Mr.Alok Bakshi, Addl. A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 24/12/2019
Heard.
Page 1 of 2
1. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner wasoriginally posted at Mahanadi Jalashay Pariyojna Disnet, Sub-DivisionNo.11, Bangoli, District Raipur and by order dated 9.8.2019(Annexure P-2) he was transferred to the post of Sub-Divisional Officer,Bhatapara, Nahar Nirman Sub-Division No.3, Tilda, Raipur, however, theorder dated 9.8.2019 was amended and deleted by corrigendum letterdated 23.8.2019 (Annexure P/4) and the petitioner was directed to joinand give his services to the original place of posting, according to which,the petitioner has joined his services at Mahanadi Jalashay Pariyojna,Sub-Division No.11, Bangoli, District Raipur on 23.9.2019. It is submittedoriginally posted at Mahanadi Jalashay Pariyojna Disnet, Sub-DivisionNo.11, Bangoli, District Raipur and by order dated 9.8.2019(Annexure P-2) he was transferred to the post of Sub-Divisional Officer,Bhatapara, Nahar Nirman Sub-Division No.3, Tilda, Raipur, however, theorder dated 9.8.2019 was amended and deleted by corrigendum letterdated 23.8.2019 (Annexure P/4) and the petitioner was directed to joinand give his services to the original place of posting, according to which,the petitioner has joined his services at Mahanadi Jalashay Pariyojna,Sub-Division No.11, Bangoli, District Raipur on 23.9.2019. It is submitted that subsequent to that, the petitioner has made a representation on29.11.2019 (Annexure P/1) before the respondent No.1 making a prayerfor his transfer to Bhatapara, Nahar Nirman Sub-Division No.3, Tilda,Raipur. Hence, a direction be issued to the respondents-authorities toconsider the representation of the petitioner.
2. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General for therespondents/State opposes the prayer and submits that the petitionercannot make a demand of transfer/posting as it is made in therepresentation. respondents/State opposes the prayer and submits that the petitionercannot make a demand of transfer/posting as it is made in therepresentation.
3. Considering the submissions made learned counsel for the parties andfurther considering the documents appended with the writ petition, therespondents-authorities are directed to consider the representation givenby the petitioner and take a decision within 45 days from today. further considering the documents appended with the writ petition, therespondents-authorities are directed to consider the representation givenby the petitioner and take a decision within 45 days from today.
4. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observation on therepresentation filed by the petitioner. representation filed by the petitioner.
5. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition finally standsdisposed of. No cost(s). disposed of. No cost(s).
Sd/-
(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Vacation Judge
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…