AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
11 paragraphs · 195 wordsP. Sam Koshy, J
Heard on admission.
The grievance of the petitioner is that even though the petitioner has been transferred vide order dated 14/08/2017, he is not being relieved. It is
stated that till date, the transfer order has not been stayed, varied or modified by the transferring authority.
The issue regarding implementation of transfer order, has been considered by this Court in the case of Ms. Manisha Agrawal Vs. State of
Chhattisgarh and Others, 2015 (4) C.G.L.J.182 , wherein relying upon several judgments of the Supreme Court, it has been held by this Court that
once the employee has been transferred, it is required to be complied with unless it is modified, varied or cancelled.
Therefore, in these circumstances, either the transfer order has to be implemented or the State has the option to cancel, vary or modify or keep in
abeyance.
Accordingly, this petition is disposed off with the direction that if the transfer order of the petitioner is not cancelled, varied or kept in abeyance by
the respondent-Transferring Authority till date, the petitioner would be required to be relieved towards implementation, execution of the transfer order.