Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41867 (CHH)

NEHA SAHU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/8902/2023 · 2025-08-31

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:44471 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8902 of 2023 1 - Neha Sahu D/o Ashok K Sahu Aged About 36 Years R/o Second Floor, B.G.-2/g-5, Rajaswa Colony, Dingapur, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Public Food Distribution And Consumer Protection Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur , District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Under Secretary Public Food Distribution And Consumer Protection Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Controller Legal Metrology Department Indravati Bhawan Block 2, 3rd Floor, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T. K. Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. G. A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 01/09/2025 1. This petition is preferred against orders dated 09.10.2023. 2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 "10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus as towuash the transfer order dated 09.10.2023 (ANNEXURE P/1). 10.2 That, any other relief/order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in favour of the petitioner may kindly be passed.” 3. Vide order dated 10.11.2023, the petitioner was granted stay by this Court. 4. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter and considering the fact that on the strength of the aforesaid stay order, the petitioner is still continuing at his original place of posting, as such, by the afflux of time the said orders, has lost its efficacy and as such the order(s) dated 09.10.2023 is required to be quashed and accordingly the said order under challenge is hereby quashed. 5. However, liberty is granted to the respondent State authorities to pass appropriate orders in respect of transfer of the petitioner, in case exigency arises, without being influenced by this order. 6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Saxena