LAWS(GAU)-2011-1-9

KRISHNA GOPAL DEBNATH Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

Decided On January 13, 2011
KRISHNA GOPAL DEBNATH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF TRFPURA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present writ petition, the Petitioner, a Superintendent of Handloom, working under the Department of Handloom, Handicrafts and Sericulture, Government of Tripura has challenged the order of transfer dated 6th July, 2010 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) whereby and whereunder the Petitioner has been transferred from marketing Complex, Agartala to Deocherra Handloom Cluster, Dharmanagar and the release order dated 13th July, 2010 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition) by which the Petitioner is released consequent upon the aforesaid order of transfer.

(2.) Heard Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned Addl. GA who appears at this motion stage for the State Respondents.

(3.) The Petitioner earlier also challenged the transfer order impugned herein by way of filing a writ petition which was registered as WP (C) 316/2010 and while the matter was taken up for admission hearing on 21.12.2010 on some question put by this Court regarding the pleadings of the Petitioner the learned Counsel for the Petitioner prayed for time till 5.1.2011. While opposing the prayer for time Mr. Chakraborty, learned Addl. GA submits that there no interim order passed by this Court and the concerned authority has by this time issued notice upon the Petitioner to show cause as to why action should not be taken against him for non-joining to the place of transfer. In the said order, this Court has also noted as to whether the Respondent authority will take action against the Petitioner or not is up to the Respondent-authority employer. However, ultimately prayer for time was allowed and the matter was fixed for admission hearing on 3.1.2011, On 5.1.2011 the Petitioner made a prayer for withdrawal of the case with liberty to file afresh, which was allowed. After withdrawal of the earlier petition the Petitioner, for the second time challenged the transfer order before this Court by way of filing the instant writ petition.