IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATL^ILASPUR W.P. No. 3GS3 /2003-"' r Petitioner •\\^N .*•'' . A.^-A^ ^^ r*5'^/^ R. K. MISHRA,. S/o Late Shri B. P. Mishra, aged 50 years, Principal Govt. Girls Hr. Sec. School, / Dondi, Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS Respondents : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Director, Tribal and Schedule Cast Department, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Shri M. R. Bhuarya, / Principal, / Govt. Hr. Sec. School, Surdongar, Dondi, Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/2^7 OF THE CONSTITUTION_OF INDIA, <J HICBI COURT OP JUDICATURB CTIHATnSGARH: BUASPUR SIngile Beadi: Hoa'Me Miri Srttoli K. ABnMiota-*, J. W. P. Ho. 3053 OF 20TO Petitioner : R.K. Mistoa ' Versus Respondeats : State of Chhatti^aiti and Another Shri Bhaskar Pyasi, couiisd for fhe petitioner. Shd Pankaj Shrivastava, paael lawyer far State/respondent No.l. ORALOItDMl (21" Pebnury, 2006J 1. The pctitioner was working as Priacqal, in Gcwt Girls Highcr Secoiidary School, Dondi, Distfc Duig. 2. Thc petitioner has napugned the transfer oider dated 16.9.2003 (Aitnexure P-5), where-by the petitioner was transferred to Govt Higher Secondary School, Suidongar, Distfc Duxg. 3. This Court, while issuing notice, granted stay ofthe impugiKd order by order dated 30.9.2003. Thc petitioner has contmucd on the same plaoc of posting, ever sinGe. The pettdoner has already availed the benefit af iaterun order dated 30.9.2003. By ordcr dated 30.9.2003, the petitioncr has beca granted finaln;lie£ 4. It is wdl settted principte of law fhat transfer is aa incident of serwcc and it is fcr the employer to decide as-to where a particiilar ofiBoer/cmptoyee be posted keepiag ia vwsw publfc intcTCSt as weU as admmisteative exigency. This Court has Umited jurisdiction to iaterfere in the teansfer matter and ttus Court can interfere onfy in the case of proved xaala&le, non- coinpetence of aufharity passing the transfer oider and transfer order not bein^ ia coiiformi^ wifh fhe rutes and r^ulatfons. In the facts and ciroiunstances of the ease, it is not nccessaiy to exaaunc validity of flic traasfer order at this stage. In thc facts of the casc, the respondents aze duected not to insist upon coinpliaxice of the impugned transfer oider. S. This petitton has becoiiie mfructuous with the pasaage of tiaie. Accoidingty, the petition is disaussed as haviag become iufructuous. However, respondents/authorities are at liberiy to pass appxopriate order for postu^ the petitioner in the public interest and administeative cxigea<y, in aticosSasce with law. No ordcr as to costs. Sd/- Satish K: Agmhotri Judge