3^< c '^"-::QT(5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF TUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P.NO. 3Z&-6 /2004 PETITIONER ^.-••r'^a^^' ^'sS^S^ •••••^" chA.!>i-''/lt •<.C.l<*\" ?.^- -'t'O.Q^ <sw^(:-^" "^^.^w"" RESFONDENTS 1] Jogtram Bhargav S/o. Pakalu Ram Suryavanshi, Aged about 45 years, C^- R/o.ViUageRatanpur,Distt.Surguja (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary, Home Department, State of C.G. D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2] Police Station Incharge, Police Station Masturi, Lormi, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 3] Ramkumar Gupta, S/o. Badru, Aged about 50 years, R/'o. Ramepur, Lormi, Police Station Lormi, Distt. BUaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226^227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA M w&''- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. No. 3206 of 2004 Petitioner Jogiram Bhargav Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & others SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri, J Mr. Manoj Paranjape, Advocate forthe petitioner. IVis. Deepali Pandey, Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State ORDER (Passed on this 27th day of February, 2007) The following order of the Court is passed by Satish K. Agnihotri, J. S!E^lfflEi& Bablu 1. The petitioner, while working as h'ead Constable m Biiaspur district, was transferred to Dantewada district, on the same terms and conditions vide impugned transfer order dated 2.8.2004 (P/4). 2. This Court, vide interim order dated 20.09.2004, has stayed the impugned order dated 2.8.2004 (P/4) till the next date of hearing. 3. Be that as it may, with the passage of time this petition has become infrucluous, as period of transfer is not applicable forever. At this point of time there is no question to examine the vaiidify of the transfer order. However, ttie respondents are at liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view the public interest and administrative exigency, without insisting on compliance ofthe impugned transfer order. 4. It is wel! settled principle of law that transfer is an incidence of service and it is for the employer to decide as to where a particular officer/employee be posted keeping in view pubtic interest as well as administrative exigency. This Court has limited jurisdiction to interfere with the transfer matter and this Court can interfere only in the case of proved malafide, non-competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the rules and regulations. 5. In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. —— -——~7 SA'- Satish -K. Agnihotri Judge ':A