^^ 08n°r^i V- \^ .»-• t^''^-p""" ,(eSB"~ '•.:.-'•" ^r^ -ys 3 *ii'i-i1^ ynTltf'id ^sf ^WTlcfiT, Rditf'i'; ^QiTO 'yiRtpi ycp'<"i C(^T)^O....?.»........ / 2006 If BEE!2h 's ^ifqcnicpal : •»W[t3TRO ^to Ryc|ch^i N39 45 cpf TT^T ^t SfKO 3TRO R«c|cti*li, qcAcT <t>ld1'lll 'i^ul^ fuMT t1';<J,ufl ^OlTO sRPT viTCRmc<i<iui : ^ --V 1. y^'Tl'y^id ^TRT'T, 5T?r fui'Tii^Tl^i ^FRq 1uT?TT •y'i^ufl B.^T. 2. •aft Wipr y<TT, imT& f^IcTT RRTT srfSRiTSt ctiltjld^ ^r?TT f^RTT 3I^R?T^, 'q^uty'i, f^TpTT •M<ijJ,utl BO^TO ^. / 3. •2ft 3(uPT ft-STT, gTTI^t 'Hgl^ch -H'Tlld* 1^STT, •q^uiy'i f^TT , ^ ^TT\JTT 'SO^O ^\<^f \\ "^ 4. <ft <<'4l"1c< ^, ~V^yi W^t, HTsrfil^ ^TTcTT, T1c||q|\i| ?hh^$^ 'y'iul^ fwTcTT <a';^u)l ®OTTO 5. yCT'il'M^id ?TP^T, ETRT ^1? r, RRTT f^TPT, ^tO c^ O T?TT O 'W-T, W^!. ^OTTO qTl^R)T_31tpfn ar'I^? 226 •Mg^Rd 3T-[^^ 227 iTRtfrlT ^ftoFT, F COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BiLASPUR SiNQLE BENCH_: HON'Bl.E MR. SATiSH K. AGNIHOTRI, J. Petitioner versus Smt. R.B.Vishwakarma State of Chhattisgarh and others Preseni : Mr. Atul Pandey, counsei for the pstitsoner. Mr. Ajay Dwivedi, Panei Lawyer for respondents No.1 and 5. ' None app88.rs for othsr respondents. (Passed on 11'" of October, 2006) Learned counse! appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who v.as working as Hsadmistress, Government Giris Primary School, Surajpur, has been transferred as District Education Officer, Ramanujganj, by impugned order dated 7-7-2005 (Annexure q-1). 2. The petitioner has chailenged the impugned transfer ordsr on the ground that as per the transfer policy of the Government, an empioyee should 'oe posted at a piace where his/h.er spouse is working, as far as possib!e. Husband of the petitioner, nameiy, Shri R.R. VishVi/akarma is posted at Surajpur. 3. The transfer poiicy provldes for "as far as possible". The poiicy is not mandatory that in aii ths events husband/wsfe should bs posted at a placs where his/hsr spouse is posted. Thls Is for the smployer to dsclde, looking to the administrative exigency and pubiic interest. Oid piace of posting and the new transfsrred place of posting is within ths same district. 4. 'he petitioner has not ralsed any other ground to assai! the impugned transfer order. 5. It is well settlsd principle of iaw that transfer is an incidsnt of ssrvics and it is for the empioyer to decide as to whers a particular officei'/empioyee be posted keeping in view pubilc interesf as wei! as administrativs exigency. This Court has iimlted jurisdiction to intsrfere 'A'ith the transfer matters and this Court can interfere only v/ith the case of proved mala fide, non-competence of authority passing the trsnsfer order and transfer order not being in conformity wifh the rules and regutations. None of the above grounds are availabie to the petitioner. Gops s. For the reasons aforsstated and as a result, this petition is dismlssed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge tr -Tgaa^-