^ IN IHE HIOH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CG) i®ITPETITION NO.^S^J OP 2004 SSTWEEN Krlshna Ghandra Barihg S/o Mayadhar Bariha, aged 43 yesrs, Occupation Assistan-fc Teacher, posted at Primary School iTamajuda, Pithora,' District Mghasanund (CG) . PETITIONER X: N D 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The Stat®of Chhat'bisga.i-h, -fchroiigh -the SecrejsarY Depar-bnent of Schodil Ed'uca'fcion, Mantralay, D.K.S. Suilding, Raipi-u- (CG) . Distrlct: Education Offlcer, MahaSEtnurd (CS) . Collec'fcor, Mghasaround, Disfcrict: Mahasamun3 (CG). Dr. Trivitergn Bhoi , MLA, F-3 ^yodhya Apartsnent, MLA Res-fc House, Ring R@a<3 N0.1, Raipur (CG) . Kailash Sahu, resident of Vlllage Salhe Tarai, Vjlsas Khand Pithora, Dtsticic-b Mahasamund (CG). RESPONDENTS' WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THB 03 NSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. -P-a.ctLinul ^2ms f^ ^'"^^ -i5^j-..;jfcLj_, e Bablu HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. No. 2583 of 2004 Petitioner Krishna Chandra Bariha Versus Respondents The Slate of Chhatti^arh & others SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri, J Mr. Sunil Sahu, counsel forthe petitioner. Ms. Deepali Pandey, Panel Lawyer for the respondents No. 1 and 2/ State. None appears Tor the respondents No. 3 and 4. ORDER (Passed on this 27th day of February, 2007) 1. The petitioner, whiie working as Assistant Teacher in Primary Schooi, Jamjuda, Pithoura, was transferred to Middle School, Khemda, Baghbahara on the same terms and conditions vide impugned transfer order dated 31.7.2004 (P/2). 2. This Court, vids intsrim order dated 20.08.2004, has stayed the impugned order dated 31.7.2004 (P/2) till the next date of hearing. By virtue of the interim order, the petitioner must have continued on the same piace of posting. 3. Be that as it may, with the passage of time this petition has become infructuous, as period of transfer is not applicable forever. At this point of time there is.no question to examine ttie validity of the transfer order. However, the respondents are at liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view the public interest and administrative exigency, wnnout insisting on compiiance ot me impugnea transrer oraer. 4. It is well settled principle of law that transfer is an incidence 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 with the transfer matter and this Court can interfere only in the case of proved maiafide, non-competence of au&iority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the ruies and regulations. 5. in view of the above, this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ESB