-1 - c S- .(00 IN THE HON'BLE HIfflH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR C.G. PETITIONER ... RESPONDANTS ••"\ W.P.(S)No. £(2-2- 2011 Smt. Budhwantin Netam. aged 56 years,(^/j3 late Shri Kamta Prasad Head Master, Govt. Girl's Primary School, Gunderdehi, Block Gunderdehi, District Durg C.G., VERSUS 1. The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur C.G. 2. The District Education Officer, Durg ( C.G.) 3. Block Education, Officer, Gunderdehi, Distt. Durg C.G. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTrTUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTION OF ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT. HIOH COIJRT OF CHHA'ITISdARH AT BILA8PUR PRTITIONF.S 'RIT FETmON (S') No. 6122 of'2011 Smt. Budhwantin Netam. VRR8US The Srate Govt.. of Chhattisgarh & WMT PEm'ION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF •IIffi CONS'nTUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'We Stiri Satisli K. Asnihotri, .1. Present.: Shri Somkant Verma.. Advocate for the oetrtioner. Snri Ajit Singh, pane! Lawyer for uie Siale/responuent No. 1 lo 3. (Passed on 14th day ofOctober, 2011) The Detitioner imnusns the order dated 15.07,2011 fAnnexiire P/l\ wherebv, the oetitioner. workme a.s Head Ma.st.er at Giris Primarv School. Gunderdehi, has been transferred to Primarv Scfaooi. Tumakhurd. Dhamdha- on the eround that tlic same was not oassed bv a comoet.ent authoritv i.e. the Collect.or. in accordanoe with the oolicv decision dated 13,06.2011. It a.ooears that the transfer order has been aooroved bv Ifae Collector. tfaough the same has been oassed bv the Dtstrict lauegtion i-MIlcer. Ltiire. 1'tie netrtioner tias cttosen to aooroa« thig Court afi.er more t.han frwo and half months. thus. tlie imporf.ance of questioning the transfer order does not survive, as it aoneara that fhe traasfer has been chaUeneed on account. ofthe tiiat in some cases. the transfer order issued bv noa-comoetent officer, has been caaceUed. Ifthe transfer order has heen coinolied with, tiiere is no auestioH ofreconsiderine the validitv oftfae same. Traarfer is an incidence of service and the netitioner- in a.11 ma.tters is not iikely to sufffer, if the petitioner has already accepted by jonBngthenewplace ofposit.ing. Tfaus, at ttiis stage, it isnot proper to examiae the legality and validity ofthe impuened transfer order. As a. result, if the oetitioner ha.s alreadv not been reiieved. tfae transfer order dated 15,07.2011 ('Anaexiire P./'l'l in resoect. ofthe petitioaer, shall not be given effect to, unt.il a fresh order is passed by the competait. authority in pi.iblic mterest aud in administrafive exiaencv. Accordiagly, the 'writ petition disposed bf. No order asto costs. Sd/- SATISH K. ANGNIHOW Judge