C/P’WJ/f PETITIONER RESPONDENTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPQQ W. g0. g /2007 : 'Vijay Khalkho S/O Late Shri Oliver Khalkho, aged about 43 years, R/o— R.T.S. Colony , Bilaspur , Post and Distt. Bilaspur (Chhatttisgarh). VERSUS / I. State ofChhattisgarh Through Secretary Deptt. of Urban Administration ' and Development D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) Commissioner ofUrban Administration and Development Office Raipur (C.G.,) Deputy Director of Urban Administrative and Development Office Bilaspur (C.G.) / 4. Collector Bilaspur (C.G.) a WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22(6/f2gz OF THE CONSTITUTIGI‘E O11“ INDIA. e xx HIGH COURT OF CHHA’ITISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 696 of 2007 Petitioner: Vijay Khalkho Versus Respondcnts: State of Chhattisgarh as others SiMe Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agiihotri. Smt. Renu Kocher, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey,‘ Govt. Advocate for the Respondents. Shri Sanjay K. Agaxwal’ Advocate for the Caveator. O R D E R ( Passed on this 13th day of Febmary, 2007) The following order of the Court is passed by Satish K. Agihohi, J. 1. The petitioner, who was working as ad hoe Executive Engineer in the Divisionr-H (mice, Utban Adminisuation and Development (Technical Cell), Bilaspur was tlansferred to the Municipal Corporation Ambikapur, District- Surguja on deputation vide order dated 10.1.2007 (Annexme P/ 1). On the same date by another onler (Annexure P/6) one Shri Nityanand Uppadhyaya, Assistant Engineer was dixected to look akr the additional charge of the post of Executive Engineer, Which- was &llen vacant on account of the hansfer of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel/appearing for the petitbner submits that this transfer of the petitioner from Bilaspur to Ambikapur on deputation amounts to malande exemise of powers, as both the orders were passed on the same date. It is beyond comprehension as to how it amounts to malatirle. It is but natural that once the post of Executive Engineer is fallen vacant, some other junior o$cer has to look after the routine work, performed by the Executive Engineer. Thus, the maiaiide, as alleged, is Without any basis, thus, the contention of the petitioner deserves to be rejected. 3. With regard to other contention that the order as per the circular dated 24.1.2007 can be passed .by the officer of equal rank i.e. Executive Engineer, it, is for the State to appoint as early as possible a competent omcer in the public interest to look aiier the work of the Executive Engineer, which has fallrn vamnt on account of the transfer of the peu‘tioner. 4. It is well settled ptiuciple of law that transfer is an incident of service and it is for the employer to decide as to Where a parh'cular o$cer/employee be posted keeping in view public interest as well as administrative exigency. This Court has limited jurisdiciion to interfexe in the transfer matter and this Couit can interfere only in the case of proved malande, non—competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the rules and regulations. None of the above grounds are availab to the petitioner. L ' 5. In the opinion of this Court, there is no merit in this petition. The petitioner has no right to posting at a particular place. It appears that the order has been passed in public interest due to administrative exigency. Thus the pétition deserves to be and i dismissed, accordingly. 6. The respondents/State may consider the representation of the petitioner, if any; keeping in view the study of children of the petitioner and their ensuring examinations. 7. A copy of this order be sent to the Secretary, Urban Administration and Development Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur to see that some competent omcer is appointed on the post of Executive Engineer, which has fallen vacant due to transfer of the petitioner, in the public interest. 8. In View of the foregoing, the petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. -#‘_#M Sdl- . . 1 Satish K. Agmhotri I Judge 1 l Thakur s