1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7475 of 2025 1 - Satish Kumar Chelak S/o Shri Dr. D.D. Chelak Aged About 58 Years Add. F - 3, Civil Line, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Water Resource Department Chhattisgarh Government Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chief Engineer Mahanadi Godavari Kachhar Water Resource Department Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintending Engineer Water Resource Department Shivnath Mandal Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - Executive Engineer E And T Light Machinery Tube Well And Gate Durg Division, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Dubey, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. P. Kale, Add. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 17/07/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition claiming for the following reliefs:- SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.07.18 10:48:24 +0530 2 “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside transfer order dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure P/1), as for as petitioner is concerned. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the representation (Annexure-P/3) filed by the petitioner within stipulated time of four weeks, in the interest of justice. 10.3 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any other or further order(s) deemed fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances in the matter.” 2. After arguing for sometimes, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, there is a provision under clause 8 of the transfer policy dated 05-06-2025 for making a representation before the transfer committee. Therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to move his representation before the said transfer committee and the said transfer committee may be directed to decide the representation, so filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law within the stipulated time frame. 3. The submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by the State counsel and would submit that he has no objection, if such a direction is to be given to the transfer committee to decide the representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within the stipulated time frame. 3 4. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to make his representation before the transfer committee as provided under clause 8 of the said transfer policy dated 05-06-2025, and if such representation is made to the said committee, the same shall be decided in accordance with law on its own merits within a further period of one month from the date of receipt of the representation along with the copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid observation, the present petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika