@ mxm“3% £30 3d §a+ma §§ mm Ed 3%2 gag I.I:Il"lll.l.l llnlll .l"llu.II-‘4Ial'| Ci: J 4 $F mmgEmm mo$32 gawma .mwmqma «E mam Egg am ”3. mqm ”in ww m5 mamEa3g qm.3 aid, ga mmjim 403a awmadn $§ wE maa mmqymg .. moé “in w}? .Evwm «mi3:. .333. wovww§£mu~ mmdmm &EMM wag 34: 3i a§q$ mu“ .Emamgm, mmouaw aqmmnqmwim m3 a Hanoqja ma? g3 agiaa 3% ‘Ill' "II'I..- HIGH COURT OF CHHATmGARH AT BILASPUR w,P. (s; Na. 3782 of2oo5 Petitioner Khiiawan Ram Sahu Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & others SB: Hcn'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. J Shri Y C Sharma Advocate for the petitianer V V S Murthy, Deputy Advocate General With Smt Anju Ahuja Deputy Govt Advocate for the respondents/State O R D E R (Passed on this 9‘" day or March, 2007) The following order of the Court is passed by Satish K. Agnihotri, J. 1. The petitioner while working as Assistant Teacher in Midle School, Bhedia, Navagaon, Block - Balod‘ District — Durg was transferred to Middle School Kudari. Dalli. Dondl Lohara. on the same terms and conditions, vide order dated 6.9.2001 (Annexure N1). 2. The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Raipur vlde interim order dated 1 7.9.2001 directed to maintain status quo in regard to the position of the petitioner as it was prevailing on 13.§.2001. By virtue of the interim order the petitioner is continuing at the original place of posting. 3. Be that as it may, with the passage of time this petition has become infructuous as period of tiansfer is not appiicable forever. At this point of time there is no question to examine the validity of the transfet order. However, the respondents are at liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in View the public interest and administrative exigency, without insisting on compliance of the impugned transfer order. 4. it is well settled principle of law that transfer is an incident of service and it is for the employer to decide as to where a particular officer/employee be posted, keeping in View public interest as well as administrative exigency. This Court has limited jurisdiction to interfere in the transfer matter and this Court can interfere only in the case of proved malafide. non-competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the rutes and regulations. 5. ln view of the above. this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. LN Sd/— Satlsh K Agmhotrl l Judge l i Thakur