\-< ^- ~~\ VJ W.P.ISl No. 6S8S of 3007 T.S. Dhniwa, S/o. lAte Jainuna Lal Dhruwa, aged about 48 years, Deputy Rauger, Porest Rauge Office- Pithora, District Mahasamund (C.G.), R/o, Hthora Forest Colony, TahsU and District Mahasaiaund (C.G.) 1. The Stafe of Chliattisgarh Throiigh - the Secretaiy Departineat of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 2. Under Secretaiy, Departinent of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) 3. Divisional Foi-est Officer, Forest Divisioii Mabasamuad, Talisil and District Mahasamund (C.G.) CONSTITU7IOB OF IHDIA Presence : Shri Raghvendra Pradhan, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Pradeep Singh, Paael Lawyer for the State on advance copy. PRAI.^RDJBR (15.11.20071 SUNIL KUBSAR SINHA. J. Heanl on adinission. The petitioner, who is workiug on the post of Dy. Ranger, has been transfen-ed froin PithoTaVan MaBdal Mahasainund to Van Mandal Raipur by order dated 31.8.2007 (Annexure-P/1). Leamed counsel for the petitioner argues that on 7.7.2006, the petitioner was transfen-ed froro Pithora Van Maadal to Forest. Range West Pitliora, thercfore; fhjs is the fequent transfer. l.do not fiod any fore in the arguments advance by the leamed counsel for the petitioner. By oi-der dated 7.7.2006, the petitioner was sent in a diffei-ent Van Pariksheti-a botb situated iu Mabasamuiid Van Mandai, thei'efore, it was oniy like a iocal aiTaugement and now this tiine onty, tae 1ias toeen transfen-ed froin Pithora to Van Mandal Raipur. W.P.(8)No. 6585 of 2007 The transfer is a.n incidence of service. Nobody workins on a ti^ansfei-ahle post can daim for his posting at a particular place. Who shoiild be posted where is to bf" seen by the employer which depends upon the adnuoistrative exigency as also pubtic mtei-est. Uiiless the orAer of transfer is sbown to be vjtiated by malafides, extraneous considei-ations or is shown to be passed against any stetutoi'y m1e or the Act, ftie saine cannot be interfered with by a Conrt of 1aw, is the settied view offhe Apex Court. I-^amed coiinsel for the petitioner coiikl not noint oirt any such groiind of niajafide or of extraneous consideration or that the oider has been passed against any statutoiy nile or the Act Por tlie foregoing reasons, 1 aia not inclined to adiTiit this petition for hearuig. The petition is not worth adniission. The same is dismissed at fhe motion staee itsdf. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge vatti