wmsm 3mg; 5” h IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT 'BILAspUR (CHHATTISGARH) WRIT PET1T10N(S) No. {3.3a /2o1 1. PETITIONER: /Nirdesh Kurriar Banjare, son of D.R.Banjare, aged about'43 year, working as Upper Division Teacher, Govt.Midd1e School, Sambalpur, Block Navagarh, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. VerSuS Respondents L/State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, School Education Department, Dau Kalyan Singh / Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 0. x 2. Disrn‘ct Education Officer, Bemetara, ( District Durg, Chhattisgarh. / 3. Collector, Durg, District Durg, /Chhattisgarh. 4. Block Education Offlcer, Block Navagarh, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ' U HIGH COURT OF CHHA’TT‘ISGARH AT EH [ASPE IR ‘vVRlT E’ETH‘ION (S) N0. 6234 ofZOll WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICI 4F. 226 OF 'I‘HE CONSTHUI'ION OF INDIA SB: Hon’hle Shri Satish K. Agnihotri. J. Present: Shn' C.J.K.Rao, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Arum Sao, Guvernmsnt Advocate for the State. ORDER ORA] A (I’assed on 19 day of October, 2611) The petitioner impugns the order dated 15.07.2011 (Armexure 13/1)? whereby, the petitioner, working as Ugper Divisiou Teacher at Middle School Sambalpug Block Nawagarh: has been transferred to Middle School? Bahingag Block Berla: on the ground that the same was not. passed by a. competent authority Le. the Collector. in accordance with the policy decision dated 13,06.20l 1. 2. It. apoears that the transfer order has been approved by the Collector, though the same has been passed by the District Education Officer, Bemetara. The petitioner has chosen to approach this Court alter more than three months, thus, the importance of questioning the transfer order does not survive, as it appears that. the transfer has been challenged on account. of the fact that in some cases. the transfer order issued by non-competent otiicer. has been cancelled. Ifthe transfer order has been complied with. there is no question of reconsidering the validity ofthe same. 3. Transfer is an incidence of service and the petitioner, in all matters is not likely to suffer, if the petitioner has already accepted by joining the new place ofposting. Thus: at this stage, it is not proper to examine the legality and validity ofthe impugned transfer order. 4, If the petitioner has already not been relieved, the transfer order dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P/l) in respect of the petitioner, shall not. be given etfect. to, until a. fresh order is passed by the competent authority in public interest and in administrative extgency, 5, Accordingly, the writ. petition disposed of. No order asto costs. Sd/— SATISH K. ANGNH‘IORI Judge PETITIONER : Nirdesh Kumar Banjare. VER SI IS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & Others.