Chattisgarh High Court
Bharat Ram Salam vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 7 July, 2022
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 4740 of 2022
• Bharat Ram Salam S/o Shri N.R. Salam, Aged About 41 Years Presently
Working As Forester (Circle Forest Officer), Office Of Assistant Range Officer,
Circle, Pratappur, Forest Division- West Bhanupratappur, District North Bastar
(Chhattisgarh)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest,
Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur,
Chhattisgarh
2. Conservator Of Forest, Circle Kanker, District North Bastar (Chhattisgarh)
3. Divisional Forest Officer, West Bhanupratappur, District North Bastar
(Chhattisgarh)
4. Ashok Kumar Mandavi, Presently Posted As Forester, Maroda, Circle West
Paralkot, Bhanupratappur, District North Bastar (Chhattisgarh)
---- Respondents
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For petitioner : Mr. Atnu Ghosh, Advocate.
For Respondent/State : Mr. Akash Pandey, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas.
Order on Board
(07-07-2022)
1. The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition being aggrieved with
the order dated 22-6-2022 (Annexue P/1) passed by the respondent No.3
whereby he has been transferred from Circle Prartappur to Circle Barkot.
2. Learned counsel for the petiitioner would submit that initially the
petitioner has been appointed as Forester (Vanpal) and posed in the
office of Assistant Range Officer, Khairkatta. The respondent No.3
transferred the petitioner from the office of Asistant Range Oficer
Kharkata to the office of Assistant Range Officer Kapsi vide order dated
22-10-2021 (Annexure P/2). Thereafter within a short span of 4 months
again he has been transferrred from the office of Assistant Range Officer
Kapsi to the office of the Assistant Range Officer, Pratapur vide order
dated 10-1-2022 (Annexure P/3) passed by the respondent No.2.
The petitiooner joined his duty and pursuant of the order ated 10-1-
2022 at Pratappur, he has been performing the duties with sincerity.
All of a sudden, by the order datd 22-6-2022 (Annexure P/1) again
he has been transferred from the office of Assistant Range Officer
Pratappur (Range Kapsi) to the ofice of Assistant Range Officer
Barkot (Range West Paralot). He would further submit that within a
shortm span of nine months he has been transferred thrice and the
petiitioner has become a victim of frequent transfer. He would further
submit that the wife of the petitioner is also an employee of the State
Government working as Teacher in the Department of School
Education and is posted at Government Primary School, PV 122
Block Koilibeda, District North Bastar. He would further submit that
both petitioner and his wife are working under the State Government
and are residing at Kloilebeda and their children are also studying
there and all of a sudden the petitioner has been transferred to a new
place which would seriously affect the family members of the petitiner,
therefore, he would submit that as per policy, husband and wife
should be posted at one place. He would further submit that transfer
order is against the policy of the Government and according to the
policy, the Government should make endeavour that husband and
wife shall remain posted at one place of posting, therefore, the
transfer order may kindly be stayed. Lastly he would submit that he
may be given liberty to make a representation before the respondents
authority and same shall be considered and decided by the
respondents authorities within two months.
3. I have heard learnd counsel for the parties.
4. From perusal of the record, it would reflect that within a short span of
nine months, the petitioner has been posted on different forest
ranges of same circle.
5. In view of the above, I am not inclined to grant interm relief.
Accordingly, I.A. 1 of 2022 is rejected. However, it is directed that the
petitioner shall file a representation before concerned respondent
authorities within a period of two weeks raising all his persional
difficulties and grievances and on such represenation being filed, the
respondent authorities shall consider and decide the same, in
accordance with policy of the Government within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of a copy of the representation,
keeping in mind the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil
Appeal No 1243 of 2022 (S.K. Nausad Rahaman and others vs.
Unio of India and orthers) decided on 10-3-2022 whereiin the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed in para 53 which is extracted as
under:
"53. In considering whether any modification
of the policy is necessary, they must bear in
mind the need for a proportional relationship
between the objects of the policy and the
means which are adopted to implement it.
The policy above all has to fulfill the test of
legitimacy, suitability, necessity and of
balancing the values which underlie a
decision making process informed by
constitutional values. Hence while we uphold
the judgment of the Division Bench of the
Kerala High Court, we leave it open to the
respondents to revisit the policy to
accommodate posting of spouses, the needs
of the disabled and compassionate grounds.
Such an exercise has to be left within the
domain of the executive, ensuring in the
process that constitutional values which
underlie Articles 14, 15 and 16 and Article
21 of the Constitution are duly protected.
The appeals shall be disposed of in the
above terms".
6. With the aforesaid observations and direction, the instant writ petition
(s) stands disposed of. Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
JUDGE
Raju
