H1GH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH ^.<. CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI H.L. DATTU, CJ & HON'BLE SHRI V.K. SHRIVASTAVA, <J. WRIT APPEAL N0. 58 OF 2007 APPELLANT PETITIONER Bansi Lal Sahu, son of Shri D.R. Sahu, aged about 58years, Occupation : Sen/ice as Sub Inspector in the Chhattisgarh Potice, Posted at City Kotwaii, Mahasamund, resident of Mahasamund, Tehsii and Disfrict Mahasamund (C.G.). Versus RESPONDENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Mantralay, D.K.S. Bhav^n, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Under Secretar/, Department of Home, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.). The Director General of Potice, P.H.Q., Raipur, Tehsil and District Raipur (C.G.). The Superintendent of Potice, Mahasamund, Tehsil and District Mahasarhund (C.G.). Present:- Shri Awadh Tirpathi, counsel for the appeilant. Shri N.K. Agrawal, Dy. Adyocate General forthe State/respondents. ORALORDER (Passed on 23ra March, 2007) The following oral order of the Court was passed by H.L. Dattu, CJ This appeat is against the orderpassed bythe learned Single Judge inW.P.No.6852/2006 dated 9-1-2007. 2) Appeltant is emplqyed as Sub Inspector. He was transferred by an order dated 9/10-3-2006 from Mahasamund District to Sarguja Range. Aggrieved by the saidtransfer order he was before this Court on an earlier 4.2 occasion in W.P.No. 1354/2006. This Court was pleased to dispose of the said writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to make an appropriate representation before the respondents bringing out all his difficutties in joining the transferred ptace and a further direction was issued to the respondents to consider the representafion in accordance with law. 3) After disposal of the writ petition, the appefiant had filed a representation before the respondents and that representation was considered by the respondents &ndthey have passed an orderwhich is not in favour of the appellant. 4) Aggrieved by the order of transfer passed earlier and also the order rejecting his representation, the appeliant has approached this Court in W.P.No,6852/2006. The learned Single Judge has rejected the writ petition and that is how the appellant is before us in this appeal, 5) At the outset, we would like to state that transfer is an incident of sen/ice and the appellant has been transferred from Mahasamund Districtto Sarguja Range. tt is expected ofa disciplined employee iike^the appetlant to obey the orders and directions jssued by the superiorauthorities. Shri Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would submit that violating the transfer policy issued bythe State Government, the respondents have transferred the appetlant . 6) Since the transfer is an exigency of service, in our opinion, the respondents had not oommitted any irregularity to call for our interference in this matter In that view ofthe matter, we do not incline to entertain this writ appeal. Accordingly, this writ appeal requires to be and is accordingiy /I —-. rejected. Ordered accordingiy. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge