c ^Q[ [GH: ;> C.G. ,T fK mow::so.^s^/: 'etition naaer Article 336/337-cSfbe Gonstitutio.n of Indial /^ ^^y 'y(.o <^ Ajab Singhl'na&ur, agedabout5lj''ts S/o Koshc? Singli Thafcur at present working as a A-sstt. Teacher, Primait? Giris Sehool, RainagaT, Bikas Developinent, Bakawarid, Distt. Bastar, C.G., R/o village Mbhali, Talisil Jagadalpur, Distt. Bastar, C.G. w M ^ ^A^: -»• ^6i Stata of Chhattisgarh, tlirougll the SecTetary, Sehool Educatlbn DepartsEreot, O.X.S. yhawaa, Ra.y:»UjT (C.G'.j , ' , ,, ; . :: •• Tfae DiTeetoTj Piiblic EttucaAion, Raipur, :Distt. Ea^)itr:{©.G.| . '' , : ; .. - . •:-' /^t Tlii&^istiAct Etlu.ea.tion. Offieei', Basfar at Jagadalpur, Disft. BastaT,C.G. The Colle-etor at Jaesidalpur. Di&ft 0" ia.star. <u..t_7, priiici tia.inagar. •b". .•''•'-- • '' ^.G. :;:.^.. Priina-ry Gtrl& Sctiool, Bakawand. nistt. Bastar, PiifiGipal, Priiiiaiy SGhoQl, ? KukaDar, Sikas DevelopBieat, Daibha, Distt. Bastar^C.G,.::-' ,".-.-.:.. : ^^•••-':.' ;. ''^ ; 1(41 ^-/^L^ is^5:& i. X .lii ;•£;. >B'I] ^sSis^S ~"-f. iS;ls:a;; M'a.i)-i"i- HIGH COURT 6FCHH F11S@A3RH AT BILASPUR W.P. Nb.4Q69dL%K6 Petitioner Ajab Singh Thakur VCBSUS Respondents State of Ctihattisgarh & others 8B: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. AgnUwtri, J Shri Vishnu Kosfha, Advocate for fhe petitiLoner. Smt. AnjuAhuja, Depuly Govt Advocate forfhe respondents. ORDER - ( P&ssed on fhis l"t day ofMarch, 2007) Thc followiag onlcr ofthc CQUrt is passcd by Satlsh K. Aanihotrl, J. 1. The petttioner Whilc workmg as Assiatant Teacher in Primary Gn-ls School, Rajiiagar, District - Baster was tTausferred to Kukanar, Block - Darbha, oa fhe sanae terms and conditidns vide impugaed traasfer order dated 16.9.20QS (Aimexure P/4), wifhin: fhe same district. 2. This Court vide mterim. order dated 7.10.2005 stayed fhe effect aad operation of fhe itnpugned transfer order. Vy virtue of fh.e intcriia order,the petitioner has continued at the original place ofposiaas. 3, Be that as it may, with the passage oftimc fhis petition faas become infructuous as period of transfer is not applicable forever. At this point of time fhere is ao qucstion to examine the vaUdily of fbe teanSfer order. However, the icspondcnts are at Kberty to pass appropriate orders keepuig in view fhe public iaterest aad admmistcati.ve exigency, without insistiag on compliaace of the earUer trausfer ordcr. 4. It is weU settled pruiciple of law fhat teaxisfer is an mcident of seivioe and it is fbr fhe employer to decide as tp where a particular oflBcer/emptoyee Ue posted keeping in view public interest as weU as administEatwc exigency. Ttus Court has limited jurisdiction to interfere in fhe traaafer matter and fhis Coiirt cau iaterfere only ia the case of pioved mala&le, non-cpmpetence of authority passing fhe transfer order and tirausfer order adt beiag ui confonnily witfa the rules and regulatioiis. 5. In view oftfae above, fhis petyion stands disposed of. Consequenfly, M(W)P No. 4969/M05 also disposed of. No order as to costs. Thakur Sdl- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^.