Disposed

Pramod Kumar Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC11 Aug 2016WPS/3619/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order directs petitioner to file representation to State Government within ten days to claim transfer under policy clause 2.10 pending consideration by authorities for four weeks without coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to file representation to State Government within ten days; no coercive action for four weeks while representation is considered.

Pramod Kumar Sharma Vs State Of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 3619 of 2016

¶5

Pramod Kumar Sharma S/o Dauram Sharma, Aged About 61 Years R/o Ward No 7 Janjgir, Tahsil Janjgir, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat And Gramin Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶10

Commissioner, Cum Director, Panchayat Directoate Indirawati Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶11

Collector, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

¶12

Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

¶13

---- Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner : Shri Sushobhit Singh, Advocate For Respondent-State : Shri S.P. Kale, Dy. A.G., on advance copy.

¶15

S.B.:Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava

Order On Board

11/08/2016

Heard on admission.

The transfer order is under challenge only on the ground that the petitioner is going to retire on 31.05.2017. It is submitted that as per transfer policy clause 2.10 which provides that the Government servants, who are going to retire within one year, may be posted in their home district or a place of their choice if permissible under the general book circular instructions. He submits that this aspect has not been considered while transferring the petitioner.

¶20

-2-

¶21

The grounds which have been raised by the petitioner requires consideration by the respondents.

¶22

It is, however, found that the petitioner has not preferred any representation in terms of transfer policy and has rushed to this Court. Therefore, all that can be done is that in case, the petitioner prefers representation to the State Government within a period of ten days from today, the State Government shall consider and decide the same within a period of four weeks. For a period of four weeks, if any other person has not joined in the place of petitioner, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner.

¶23

The petition is accordingly disposed off.

¶24

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge

¶25

Rekha

Pramod Kumar Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

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

Athnash Ekka Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

The Managing Director, M/s Kitply Industries Ltd. Vs Shri Prabhat Kumar Singh

Santosh Pandey Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Narottam Lal Sharma Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Anupam Sharma Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rahuldeo Bhardwaj Vs State Of Chhattisgarh