Disposed

Smt. Lalita Sidar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 May 2019WPS/3303/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner sought restoration to her previous posting from Beladula to Kudumkela, Raigarh. The Court held that posting changes are within the Collector's domain and disposed of the petition by directing the petitioner to make a formal representation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to make detailed representation to Collector; response expected within four months.

Smt. Lalita Sidar Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 3303 OF 2019

¶4

Smt. Lalita Sidar W/o Shri Paras Ram Sidar Aged About 37 Years Bihind Boys School Sariya, Tahsil Barakela District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

¶5

…Petitioner(s)

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Atal Nagar, New Mantrlaya, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶8

2. The Director Land Records, Atal Nagar, New Mantralaya, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

3. The Collector (Land Records) Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

¶10

… Respondent(s)

¶11

For Petitioner : Shri Vineet Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Shri Sameer Behar, Panel Lawyer.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

03.05.2018

¶15

1. The only relief which the petitioner has claimed in this petition is to consider her posting back where she has been posted vide order dated 05.10.2018 (Annexure P/2) i.e. as a Revenue Inspector Beladula, Tehsil and District Raigarh.

¶16

2. According to the petitioner, she was promoted from the post of Patwari to Revenue Inspector vide order dated 05.10.2018 and was posted at Beladula, District Raigarh. However, vide order dated 26.02.2019 (Annexure P/1) she has now been posted from Beladula to Kudumkela, Tehsil Gharghoda, District Raigarh.

¶17

3. As has been stated by the petitioner, the distance between the two places are hardly 40 KM. The petitioner now sought for change of the place of posting from Kudumkela to the earlier place i.e. Beladula. The said request is one which is exclusively within the domain of the respondent No.3 and this court taking into consideration the nature of

¶18

¶19

dispute would not be in a position to interfere with the impugned order of posting dated 26.02.2019.

¶20

4. Let the petitioner make a detailed representation in addition to any representation that she has already made and thereafter the respondent No.3 may consider the same in accordance with rules, regulations and administrative exigency, as the case may be.

¶21

5. It is expected that the respondent No.3 shall take a decision on the representation of the petitioner at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶22

6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge

¶25

inder

Smt. Lalita Sidar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Lalita Sidar 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

Abdul Habib Qureshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sankalp Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sweeti Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nand Kumar Singh Vs Ramesh Sharma

D. Kumar Servai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Krishna Murari Khare Vs State of Chhattisgarh