Satyendra Singh Bisen Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:19008

¶3

Digitally
signed by
JYOTI
JYOTI SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.04.29
10:59:28
+0530

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

NAFR

¶6

WPS No. 2876 of 2025

¶7

1 Satyendra Singh Bisen S/o Late Hem Narayan Singh Bisen Aged About 37 Years R/o Ward No. 7, Kenwat Para, Shisham Chowk, Bhatgaon, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

2 Under Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

3 Director, Directorate Of Urban Administration And Development, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

4 Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Bhatgaon, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶14

... Respondent(s)

¶15

2

¶16

For Petitioner(s)	: Shri Vikram Pratap, Advocate
For Respondent/	: Shri Ajit singh, G.A.
State
For Respondent	: Shri Mayank Goyal on behalf of Shri Rahul
No. 4	Tamaskar, Advocate

¶17

Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

Order on Board

28/04/2025

Heard.

By the present writ petition, the petitioner, is questioning the order dated 16.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) by which the representation submitted by the petitioner in pursuance of order dated 25.02.2025 in WPS No. 272 of 2025 has been rejected.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has preferred WPS No. 272 of 2025 challenging, the order dated 26.12.2024 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Nagar Panchayat Bhatgaon, District sarangarh Bilaigarh to Nagar Panchayat Naryara, District Janjgir Champa and the said writ petition was disposed off with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner and till then there was stay in favour of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is a class IV employee and his ailing mother is also residing with him and it will be difficult for the

¶23

3

¶24

petitioner to join the new place of posting. He further submits that the respondents have rejected the representation of the petitioner by order dated 16.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) without considering the grievance raised by the petitioner.

¶25

Learned counsel for the respondents/ State on instructions submits that, as far as, the transfer of employees of the State government is concerned, the State government has decided to constitute a committee to consider the grievance of the employees in case of transfer and placed a copy of the order dated 03.03.2025. He further submits that if the petitioner will approach the said committee, the committee will decide the same in accordance with the relevant transfer policy and relevant law.

¶26

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

¶27

Hence, looking to the grievance of the petitioner, it is directed that the petitioner shall approach the committee constituted by order dated 03.03.2025 with a representation within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case of filing of the representation, the said committee shall decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law and the policy within a period of 25 days from the date of filing of the representation. Till then, the transfer order dated 26.12.2024 (annexure P-2) shall remain stayed .

¶28

4

¶29