HIGH COURT OF ¢HHATT!SGARH AI BILASPUR W‘P. (S) No. 4692 of 2006 WRIT PETITQIN QNQER ARTIGLE 22§!22T OF WE CONSTITUTION OF iNDiA. SB: Hon'bie Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri Shri Sachin Tamrakar. Advocate for the pe‘iitioner. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the respondent No.1 . Shri Ghanshyam Pate}. Advocate for'the respondent No.2. Shri Sanjay K. Agarwai, Advocate for the respondent No.3. QB_D.E_E (Passed on this 16‘" day of April, 2007} 1. The petitioner has fiied this petition chatienging the transfer order dated 21.8.2006. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as ieameot counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 submits that by virtue of the interim order dated 10.10.2006. passed by this Court, the petitioner as well as the respondent No.3, both are working at the same place i.e. Manendragarh. Petitioner Basant Jaiswal. 8/0 Late Shri R. s. Jaiswal, aged about 34 years. Dccupatian -. Service‘ presentiy posted as Sub Engineer, Nagat Patika Parishad, Manendragarh, Distt. Kerea (Chhattisgarh) Versus Respondents 1. State of Chhauisgarh, Through me Secretary, urban Adminisiraiion and Development Department. Mantralaya‘ D K s Bhawan. Raipur (Chhattis‘garh). 2. Nagar Panka . Parishad. Manendragarh, Dist. Korea, (Chhattisgam) through its Chief Municipa! Omcer. 3. Shri Chandrashemar Sahu, Sub Engineer. Nagar Panchayat, Jhagharkhand. District Korea (Chhattisgarh) Thakur @ 2. Be that as itmay. with the passage of time this hetition has become infructuous as period of transfer is not appticable forever. At this point of time there is no question to examine the validity of the transfer order. However. the respondents are at liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view the public interest and administrativeexigency, ‘ without insisting on compliance of the impugned-transfer cider. ln view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as leamed counsel for the respondent No.3 that both the persons are working at one place i.e. Manendragarh, the respondentfState is directed to pass appropriate order for placement of the petitioner and the respondent No.3. ln view of the above. this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. l l Sd/- ‘ Satish K. Agnihotri Judge