(1.) This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 6.10.2017 (Annexure A-5) passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No.5285/2017, which is still pending before the learned Single Judge, rejecting the application for grant of interim relief as filed by the petitioner/ appellant herein.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/appellant, who was working as Presiding Officer, Labour Court, District Janjgir Champa, stood compulsorily retired vide order dated21.9.2017 (Annexure P-4). The order of compulsory retirement has been challenged by filing a writ petition bearing WPS No.5285/17 before the writ Court inter alia on the ground that the order of compulsory retirement without appointing enquiry officer and presenting officer is opposed to law. Along with writ petition, an application for grant of ad-interim relief has also been filed praying that effect and operation of the order dated 21.9.2017 may be stayed during pendency of writ petition. Learned Single Judge vide order dated 6.10.2017 (Annexure A-5) declined to grant interim relief to the petitioner/ appellant by observing that the impugned order has been passed in exercise of powers under Rule 56 of the Fundamental Rules read with Rule 42 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 in the public interest.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant submits that the appellant was appointed by the then State of Madhya Pradesh with the approval of Hon'ble the Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh High Court and therefore her posting in the State of Chhattisgarh is illegal. Service record of the appellant is good and no confidential remarks adverse to her were ever communicated to her. He further submits that rejection of interim application of the appellant would amount to dismissal of her main case because the interim order by implication decided the issue finally and therefore in view of decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.255/16, parties being Ajay Gupta v. State of CG & ors, this writ appeal assailing the order dated 6.10.2017 rejecting the interim application is maintainable.