Uesyani K. Mankar vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2024 Latest Caselaw 57 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Uesyani K. Mankar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 June, 2024

Author: Narendra Kumar Vyas

Bench: Narendra Kumar Vyas

               Neutral Citation
               2024:CGHC:20511
                                                                              Page 1 of 1


                                                                                  NAFR
                        HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                     WPS No. 3153 of 2024
                 Uesyani K. Mankar S/o Kishan Mankar Aged About 35 Years
                  Occupation- Service, Presently Posted And Warking As Tahsildar
                  District- Bemetara (C.G.), Permanent R/o 1/f, Street No. 32,
                  Sector-6, Civic Centre, Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                         ---- Petitioner
                                             Versus
               1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of
                  Revenue And Disaster Mangement, Mantralaya, Mahanadi
                  Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
               2. Election Commission of India Through Secretary, Nirvachan
                  Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi.
               3. Collector Bastar, District- Baster, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                      ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate For State : Mr. Aman Tamboli, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rakesh Jha

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 20.06.2024

1. The issue involved in this writ petition has already been decided by this Court in case of Krishna Kumar Jaiswal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others [WPS No. 1391 of 2024 (decided on 15.03.2024)].

2. In view of the above, the instant writ petition also deserves to be allowed in terms of the judgment passed by this Court in case of Krishna Kumar Jaiswal (supra).

3. Accordingly, the writ petition (s) stands allowed and the transfer order so far it relates to the petitioner is quashed. However, State is free to issue any favourable order if exigency so arises.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Bhumika