Mohan Lal Prajapati Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1 / 3

¶2

2024:CGHC:40824

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 6611 of 2024

¶6

1 - Mohan Lal Prajapati S/o Shivraj Aged About 59 Years Posted As Superintending Engineer Pwd Durg Division Durg Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

2 - The Executive Engineer, Department Of Public Works Durg Division Durg, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh. .

¶11

3 - Engineer In Chief Department Of Public Works, E-In-C Pwd, Nirman Bhawan Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Dy. G.A.

¶14

SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶15

ORDER ON BOARD

¶16

17/10/2024

¶17

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

¶18

“10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ by setting aside/quash the transfer order dated 24.09.2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent.

¶19

10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other ancillary relief(s), as it

¶20

2 / 3

¶21

may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶22

10.3 Cost of the petition.”

¶23

Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 24.09.2024 (Annexure P/1) whereby, the petitioner holding the post of Sub-Engineer and posted in the office of Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Durg Division, District – Durg is transferred to the office of Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Bridge Division Kanker, District – North-Baster Kanker.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is suffering with medical ailment and is also going to retire in the month of February, 2026 and therefore, the transfer order be interdicted.

¶25

On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State opposes the submission of the counsel for the petitioner and would submit that from perusal of the impugned order dated 24.09.2024 (Annexure P/1), it is appearing that the order of transfer is issued on administrative ground. Along with the petitioner, about 32 Sub-Engineers have been transferred. Hence, it does not call for any interference.

¶26

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record.

¶27

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of grievance raised, submission of counsel for the respective parties, in the opinion of this Court, the grounds raised in the writ petition can be better appreciated by the respondent authorities, therefore, the writ petition at this stage is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit a representation before the Respondent No. 1 raising all the grounds as raised in this writ petition and in the event, the petitioner submits representation, the Respondent No. 1 shall consider and decide the same

¶28

3 / 3

¶29

in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of 03 weeks from the date of receipt of the representation.

¶30

With the aforementioned observation and direction, writ petition is disposed of.

¶31

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶32

Dey

Mohan Lal Prajapati v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Lal Prajapati v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devendra Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jeetin Dube Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Asharam Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ku. Onkar Thawait Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kirtan Kumar Rathore Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manikram Vs State of Chhattisgarh