Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3695 (CHH)

Gajendra Kumar Jolhe v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

WPS/2825/2015 · 2025-03-04

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 (WPS No. 2825 of 2015) 2025:CGHC:10715 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2825 of 2015 1 - Gajendra Kumar Jolhe S/o Pukram Jolhe Aged About 33 Years Teacher Panchayat Middle School Bahmanpali, Janpad Panchayat Kharsia Police Station Kharsia, Civil And Revenue District Raigarh Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Rural And Development Department, Mahandi Bhawan New Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 3 - The Chief Executive Officer Jila Panchayat, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 4 - The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Kharsia, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 5 - The Block Education Officer Kharsia, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 6 - Smt. Gitanjali Rathore Teacher Panchayat Middle School Bahmanpali, Janpda Panchayat Kharsia, Civil And Revenue District Raigarh Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from the Case Information System) For Petitioner :- Mr. Nitesh Sahu, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate For State :- Mr. Sharad Mishra, Panel Lawyer ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2025.03.07 10:30:30 +0530 2 (WPS No. 2825 of 2015) For Respondent Nos.3 & 4 :- Mr. Navoday Singh, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, Advocate SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 04.03.2025 1. Heard. 2. This writ petition is directed against order dated 24.04.2015 (Annexure P-1), passed by respondent No.3, whereby the petitioner’s transfer from Pre-Middle School, Nagoi to Government Middle School Bahmanpali, Janpad Panchayat, Kharsiya has been cancelled. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is bad in law and deserves to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel would support the impugned order and prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Be that as it may, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and especially considering the fact that the effect and operation of impugned transfer order dated 24.04.2015 has already been stayed by this Court’s interim order dated 06.08.2015, which is still continuing, this petition, at this stage, is disposed of by setting aside the 3 (WPS No. 2825 of 2015) impugned order dated 24.04.2015 (Annexure P/1). However, the respondent/competent authority is at liberty to pass fresh transfer order looking to the administrative exigency, if any. 6. With the aforesaid observations and direction(s) and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge @d!t!