^v ^ - IN THE HIGH COCRT QF JUiaGATUREAT BILASPUR WRITPETITIONNO. S"74--7 0004 PETITIONER R.K.Dhankar.S/o Shri B.R.Dhankar, aged 45 years, Occupation-Serviee, presently posted asAccountant in Integrated TribalWeJfareProject, Dondiloliara.RA New BusStand, Balod, District Durg (C.G.) RESPONDENTS -VERSUS- 1^;' 1. ,^y /<^7 ^yy ^•" ri? 2. 3. 4. StateofChliattisgarlithrough Principal Secretary,Department ofTribalWelfare, Mantralaya, D.KS.Bhavan,Raipur(C.G.) CoUector(TribalWelfare Branch), District Durg (C.G.) Assistmt Commissioner, Tribal Welfffl-e DepMtmeat, District Durg(CG-) Mmister-in-Cliarge, District WRIT UNDERARTIGLE226a2'EOF1'HECONSTH'U'riONOF INDIATOR^ISSIJANeEOFASlJitTABi^^ DIRECTION. Theabove named petitionermost humbly aadrespectfully begs to ubmitasunder: - 1. PARTICULARS OF THEPETITIONERfS^: As perthe ctuse title. 2. PARTICULARSOFTHERESPONDSNT(S): As per the cause title. 5d HIGH COURTPF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI^J, WRn- PETITION N0,3747 OF 2004 Petitioner Respondents versus R.K.Dhankar State of ChhatUsgarh and others Present F. Indrasen Sahu, counsel for the petib'oner. Mr. Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawysrforthe State/respondents. ORDER ind (Passed on 22"u Day ofFebruary, 2007) > The petiUoner, while woridng as Accountant in the offioe of Project Administrator, Integrated Tribaf Weltiare Project, Dondilohara has been transferred to Higher Secondary School, Ranakhujji, vide order dated 31-7-2004 (P-3). 2. No stay order was granted by this Court in this matter. The transfer order dated 31-7-2004 (P-3) must have been executed by theresDondents. 3. Be that as it may, with the passage of time, this petlfion has become infruetuous as period of transfer is not applicabte forever. At thts point of time, there is no question to examine the validity of the impugned transfer order. However, the respondents are at liberty to Sopal QS) pass appropriate orders keeping In view the pubilc Interest and administraUve exigeriey, without insisting on N>mplianee of ttie impugned transfer order. 4. It is wellsettled principleof tawthat transfer is an incident of service and it is for the employer to decided as to vrtiere a particular officer/employee be posted keeping in view public interestas wetl as administrative exigency. This Court has limited Jurisdietion to interfere in the transfer matter and this Gourt can interfere onty in the case of proved ms/a Sde, non-competenee of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the rules and regulations. 5. In view of the above, the writ peBtion stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish I^. Agnihotri judge >