High CourtsSingle Bench

Shiv Kumar Sharma vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 19 October 2022 · Citation: (2022) 10 CHH CK 0021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Parth Prateem Sahu, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (S) No. 6634 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

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

10 paragraphs · 462 words
1.

Challenge in this petition is to order dated 30th September 2022 (Annexure P-1) whereby the petitioner who is working as Assistant Professor (Hindi) and posted at Govt. Nagarjun PG Science College, Raipur, District- Raipur, has been transfered to Govt. Danteshwari PG College, Dantewada, District-Dantewada, on administrative ground.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a heart patient and is having only nine months of service to attain the age of superannuation. Petitioner is going to retire from service on 31st August 2023 and, therefore, impugned transfer order be set aside.

3.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that the petitioner is holding the transferable post and ground raised in this petition is not sufficient to interfere with the impugned order of transfer. She, however, submits that if the petitioner is aggrieved with regard to his transfer at the fag end of his service and with nine months remaining for attaining the age of superannuation, petitioner can very-well approach the Committee constituted under the Transfer Policy and if such representation is filed, it will be considered in accordance with law.

4.

At this stage, learned counsel for the State further submits that respondent No.3 who is transferred from the Govt. Danteshwari PG College, Dantewada to Govt. Nagarjun PG Science College, Raipur, has already joined his place of posting.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is not clear from the transfer order that respondent No.3 is transferred in place of petitioner and the petitioner is still working at his present place of posting.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record along with the writ petition.

7.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel or the respective parties, particularly considering the submission made of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is having nine months of service remaining for attaining the age of superannuation, I find it appropriate to dispose of writ petition with a direction to petitioner to submit a representation before the Committee constituted under the Transfer Policy within a period of 10 days from today and if such representation is submitted by the petitioner, the same shall be considered and decided by the said Committee within a further period of 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the representation.

8.

For a period of 5 weeks or till decision on the representation whichever is earlier, it is directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to impugned transfer order dated 30.09.2022 (Annexure P-1).

9.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, writ petition stands disposed of.

10.

Certified copy as per rules.