iT-u rfini 3 irf'^t s 1ifL?i-isr N.G. Basak aged about 46 years, S/o Shri N.C. Basak, R/o S.E. (Civil) The Environment and Forest, SECL, KesDogiaenis 2 South Eastern . Coa!field E j.Wt^,,-,,-) *^*.At>.ml^ I*n .•^•^/tiyin^^^ L.tf > SiE.CU l.i 11 uuyi i si.o ^i idsi u lcan cum Managing Director, Seepat Road, Bilaspur Dy. Chief Personnel Manager, South Eastern Coalfleld imited Personal Manager (EE), South Eastern Coalfieid Limited, Si.a—'i^.B^—JL:AS-.-«-----B--- )B.^.;—a» rf»tftl ESJ'ii. rBljuuri unuerAnlCie Ziii Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate for the petitioner. ^^ss&EEfi s^eas.sA y^ n=!k s& ss »A SUNIL KUMAR SINHi neara on auiriission. Petitioner- N.G. Basak is working on the post of Superintendin§ Engineer (Civil) in South Eastern Coalfield Limited (S.E.C.L.). By the impugneu order dateu 10.10.2009 and communication dated 20.10.2009, 'ne has been transferred from Korba Area to Johilla Area, in his existinc capacity and yrade of the Superintending Engineer. By the same order dateu 20.10.2009, he was reieased from Korba Area w.e.f. aften nl. — 21 °l October, 2009. The petitioner thereafter filed a representation dated '21.10.2009 (Annexure-P/4) and made a prayer that he may be retained jn Korba Area tiil the end of the academic ssssion 2009-10. The sai representation was ailowed by the concerned authority and an order dated 24/25.11.2009 was passed and it was directed that the petitioner shail continue at Korba Area tiil 30 April, 2010 and shall stand released .-^SR-:3^,.^ ^ " L.-.—'' .' ;f^'" ^"'^ '•:, <;1 •S. <i ^c ?! %. & 9 i ht" 2 W.P.fS)No. 4360 of 2010 —n^j- - from the afternoon or 2"" i\4ay, 2010 to ioin at Johilla Area in terms of the order uated 10.10.2009. T'ne petitioner did not challenge this order ear!ier anu availeu the benefits of the order and worked in Korba Area till April May, 2010. it is after avaiiing the said order, now the petitioner has filed this v.'rit petition chaiienging the communlcation of earlier transfer order dateu 10.10.2009. Mr. Kotecha argues that the order appears to be malafide. The aruurnents advanced bv Mr. Kotecha cannot be accepted in light of the ueveloprnents which have taken ptace after passing of the impugned order of transfer of the petitioner on 10.10.2009. After receivinc the communication dated 20.10.2009, the petitioner simp!y raised a ground that he should be retalned at Korba Area tiil the end of the academic session and the s-ame v/as allowed thereafter. The petitioner availed the benefits and after availing the same, now he has challenged the order oftransfer/communication by taking the ground that it vitiates by rnaiafide. The petitioner, thus, having availed fruits of the order of representation has c'nosen to challenae the oriainal order, which does not appear 10 'oe oonaTiae. Leamed counsel for the petitioner could not point out as to how the order is vitiated by malfides or it wa.s bad-in-law even otherwise. it is not in dispute that the petitioner is posted on a transferable The transfer is an incidence of service, no person transfera'oie post can make his ctaim for posting at a partieular place. !t is for the employer to see as to who should be posted at which place, keeping in mind the better functioning of the department as also the uubiic iinerest. Unless the order of transfer is shown to be vitiated by malafides or extraneous considerations or it is shown to be passed against any statutuTy Rule or the Act, normally such orders are not to be interfered by a court of law, is the settled view of the Apex Court in many cases. For the foregoing reasons, 1 do not find any substance in the petition. The petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissec Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge •VA4)-,