BEI^ '^. ^ - ^.^ ^. IN THE HIGH ^OURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (Sl No. SG 4 ^ OF 2010. PETITIONER 2^ 4'' ^ ^''J</ >'" -.•-' ^ RESPONDENTS /: Ramjeevan Yadav, S/o. Shri Rewaram Yadav, aged about 59 years, Occupation U. D. T. Govt. Middle School Paijani, Balauda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) ^2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ^3. District Education Officer, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITIOILUiroER^ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petitioner named above begs to submit as under:- / ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon'bte Shri Justice Prashant Kuinar Mishra PETITIONER RESPONDENTS W.P. 13} No.2646 of 2010 Ralieevan Yadav Versus State of Chhattisgarh and others. PETITION UNDER ARTICUE 228 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Shrl SomKant Verma, counset for the petftioner. Shri Bhaskar Payasi, P.L. forthe State / respondents No. 1 & 3. ORAL ORDER (25.06.2010) Heard. (2) The petitioner was transferred from the M.D.V. H^h School, Batocta Bazar to Mictdle Schoot, Paijani by order dated 06-08-2009. reeting aggrieved by the said order the petitioner had preferred W.P.(S) No. 4303 / 2SXSQ, whtoh was disposed of by order dated 12- 08-2009 (Annexure P/3). The order passed by this Court is reproctuced as under:- "Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for the petftioners. Ms. Sunita Jain, P.L forthe State. fiA the outset, counsei for the petftioners wants to withdraw the present petition with ftberty to ftfe representation before respondent No.2 raising aff the gnevances again^the impugned transfer order dated 6- 08-2009. He however subrrwts (haf the sakl authority be directect to decide the representation so made expecStiousty. Coynse/ for the State has no objeclion if the representatfon of (he peifGoners fs decided by the authofity concemed in accordance wtth faw. n<?) - ^' AccorcSngly, the petstion is dfsmissed as wiffidrawn wsth the ffberty as aforesaid. In the eventuality of fifing repFesentaeon by the petitioners within a period of ten days ffom the date of receff^ of copy of this order, the same /s expected to be deckled wfthin a fiir^erperiod of three weeks from (fte clate ofHs recefpt." (3) The petttioner thereafter moved a representation before the Oistnct Panchayat, Raipur, which has been decided by the impi^ned order (Annexure P/1) dated 09-10-2009. (4) In the order deciding the petitioner's representation it was mentionecl that since he was a surplus teacher in the M.D.V. High SchooS, Baioda Bazar he was informed and was directed to opt for a particular school and where he can be posted. Even after this Intormation the petitioner remained absent during counseting and was therefore posted at the Govt. Middte School, Paijani. The representation has been dismissed by a d^ailed and reasoned order. (5) Learned counsel for the p^itioner submits that his plea regarding the petltioner not being a surplus teacher has n<rt been considered. From the order passed by this Court in the eartier writ petition it does not appear that the said plea was urged before the Gourt in course of hearing on 12-08-2009. Even otherwise the earlier wnt petition chattenging the order of transfer was dismi^ed as withdrawn with llberty to move representation which the petitioner subsequently moved and has been disposed of by the impugned order. (6) in view of the above, this Court does not find any ittegalHy in the order dectding the petitioner's representation. It is settted law that :" ! -3- transfer of an emptoyee is an incidence of service and it is for the authorsty concemed to decide which employee is to be posted at which place. tt is also settled that judteiat review a@ainst the order of transfer ss permissibte on timited grounds i.e. when the order of transfer is violative of any statutory provision or is <Aherwise tainted with mala flde. No such ground for (nterference exists in this case. (7) There is no substance in the writ petition and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Prashant Kuniar Mishra Judge )c.