Disposed

Brijbhushan Singh Sarwate v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC7 Aug 2009WPS/4152/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment is a short order granting the petitioner time to make a representation to the State regarding his transfer. The petitioner, an Upper Division Teacher, challenged a transfer to a distant posting. The petition allows him to make a representation, and the impugned order remains subject to its outcome.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the petitioner to make a representation to the State within ten days. Stay of the impugned order pending the decision on the representation.

Brijbhushan Singh Sarwate Vs State of… — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2009)

¶1

‘PETITIONER

¶2

W. P. (S) N091;^Z /2009

¶3

¶4

Biébhushan Singh Sarwate , S / o^—Bhagawan Singh, Aged about48 years R/o Village ~ Parasagudi, Block — Premnagar Presently working as Upper Division Teacher in , In Middle school Bakalo, Distt. Sarguja, Chhattisgarh,

¶5

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

K RESPONDENTs L 1- State of Chhattisgarh, Through — Secretary, Adim Jati 85 Anushuchit Jatj Vikas Vibhag,

¶8

D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh,

¶9

Collector, Ambikapur, Distt. ~ Sarguja, Chhattisgarh, ‘

¶10

3h (/Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur C.G.\

¶11

¶12

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE , CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, CERTIORARI ETC.

¶13

mmwemqwiit^2M mm (W)

¶14

mmw ammm	mmm	WW @€N&§R asai‘mm
	SB : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ^PRE 07.08.2009	^{TINKER DIWAKER}
/\|: Challenge in the present 30.6.2009 passed ^{by respondent l} working as Upper Division ^Teache1 School, Bakalo, Block Premnaga. Assistant Commissioner, ^Narayan; Contention of counsel ^{for t} place ^ofposting ^{he has joined or} transfer order dated ^7.10.2008 bi has again been ^{transferred to a}p his present place of posting. Contention of counsel ^{for 1} make a representation ^{to the respc} decided in accordance ^{With law.} Counsel for the petitioner However he submits that till h petitioner ^{may be given some prote} Accordingly, the petition ^is petitioner ^{to make a representatio} the date of receipt of the copy decided Within a period ^{of three we} then the impugned ^{order shall not} Shri N.K.Mehta, counsel ^for Ms. Sunita Jain, P.L. fcr ^the ' ~ L would be allowed to perform ^{his di}	the petitioner. State. ^he State is that let the petitioner ^{ndent No.1 and the same would be} agrees to make a representation. s representation is decided, the ^{3tive order.} disposed of with a ^{direction to the} ^{n within a period of ten days from} (if this order, the same would be ^{eks from the date of its receipt. Till} petition is to the order dated Jo.1 by which the petitioner ^{who is} has been transferred from Primary , Distt. Surguja to the option of )ur. 1e petitioner ^is that ^{in his}present 10.10.2008 in compliance ^{of the} it now by the ^{impugned order he} lace which is 700 ^{kms. away from} be given effect to and ^thepetitioner ^{ities in his}present place ^ofposting. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker ,J ’ Judge . r

¶15

Fame“, .

Brijbhushan Singh Sarwate v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brijbhushan Singh Sarwate v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Seeturam Kashyap Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Ghasiram Pujari Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Madhusudan Das Vaisnav Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. Vs Rajendra Kumar Chandrakar and Ors.

Ashim Mukherjee Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Soab Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.