. -.:: -.KaIp,EU*,,,,^lrfSpffi&3te^y«®Bt!S5i)iT>B!m^;S.3^( £•<. IN THE HIGH COURTOF JUDIGATURE AT BILASPUR fGHHATTISGARH) WRTT PFmTON H04^18 QF 20Q5 PETmONER / Awadhesh Narayan Mishra, S/o Rama s Shankar Mjshra, aged 55 years, QccupaSon Service, presentty posted as Assistant Manager (Accounts) CG Rajya Van Vikas Nigam Maryadit, Barnawapara Divn. Raipur (Chhaffisgarh) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1.^-%% wy v»..^ /!„ ChhatUsgarh Rajya Van Vltas Nigam Maryadit through is ManagingOirector, H.O. Lotesh Plaza, Shankar Nagar Road, Shankar Nagar, Raipur,District Raipur (ChhatBsgarh) ^2. Managing Hrector, Chhattiisgarh Rajya Van Vilas Nig(am Maryadit, H.O. Lokash. Ptaza, Shankar Nagar Roaetr Shankar Nagar, Rapur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ^3. B. R.Jato,DyManager(A(xtts.) Chhattisgarh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam Maryadtt, H. O. L.okash Plaza, Shankar Nagar Road, Shankar Nagar, Raipur Disfnct Raipur (ChhatHSgarh) WRTT PETHION tfflDER^ AimCLE '226 OF THE coNSTmaTioii (w iNm* ixm issrawcE OF WIUT^ m NJfft»E(^ CERTIORARI. Mi»n»IMI^»ROHIBrraCTWAND OTHEft SUITABtE WRIT Oft WHUS^^^^ I^^ Olt 'DIRECTION& ORDER OIIORDERS; ^•11 _^ _..,. ; ; ®^7 The petitioner, abov&'named, mbst respectfutly begs to submit as under: 1. 2. PARTICUtARS OFTHE PETmONER: As menUoned in theCauseTitle afaove, PARTICUtARSOFTHERESPONDEWIS; Asmentloned in ttieiCaus&T1tle above. 3 XI-HQ-78 ti+icyigplT^ yCTi^!<ii»<(,t»TTl<<f<i<s,RiAwy'< . p.r'Mo- ^bir (TI n ^.s' 3ii^?r<RiR'ii<t> asiran^CTiPWp 3IT^9TtR^(ijc|i^^) S^ITSRtiRd Sfl^f\ fni<if<i«Il'ii!<inT^'Is'<l •(lult^l'; ^gif^HSII^ST 17.10.2005 Shri Manindra Shriy^stava, Sr. Advocate with Shri Afroj Khan, for the petitioner. I.A.No.8403of2005 This is an appUcatior] for ui-gent heariag. The niatter is taken up on Board. This iat^rim applicatipn staads disposed of. W.P.No.46'78/2005 Heard. Bv wav of this writ rfetition filed under Article 226 of fhe Gonstitution of India, the jietitioner, who has been traasferrcd (locally shifted) from Bamavtfapara Project, Division. Raipur to the Head Of&ce, Raipur by im tiansfer has been passed tc] Baruawapara Prpject, Mand^ pugned order dated 12.9.2005, has challenged the validity ofthi^ aforesaid order. Leamed counsel for fl^e petitioner submits that fhis order of anyhow reniove ftie petitioner froin ll Raipur for bringulg respondent no.3 ia his place, fcr which a 4eparate order dated 12.9.2005 vide Annexure P-2 hasbeen pass|ed by tiie aufhority concemed, The law in relation to uiterference by the Courts ia fhe matter of transfer is now ^i'eU, setfled. The Apex Court while dealirig wifh the matter ol[ Ken.drUciia Vfdya Seinaathan -Vs- Ocunodar Prcisad Pandefi,} 2004 AIS SCW. 5563 observed fhat the traasfer wliich is an iuctdence of service is not to be uiterfered wifh by fhe Courts ualesslit is shown to be clearly arbitraiy or vitiated t>y ma.la-fide or i4feaction of any prescribed norms _of \^y< XI-HC-78 *iraoi^W^ y-cq '-y |A| |rt<4^tJ>-rftw"l<S; Re)l'(iy<< ^..1..^..^.^...... 9 3n^?T(ra^(^c[fgeRg) _ ~3lrtCTmfe:lfT \ awaii^Tri»<i* principles govemiag fhe transfi Vs- State ofOnssa- 1995 fSupj traasfer is vitiated by malafidt guidelines, the Court caniiot in Vs- S.L. Abbas AIR 1993 SC and posted where is a luatter decide. Uafess the order of trs niade ia violation. of operative should not ordi&arily interferi others —Vs-Jfmeirdein Debaiu jr. (Please see Ambani Kanta Ray \t.)4SCC16^. Unfess the oider of [or is laade ia violation of operati.ve ferfere with it. (See Union oflndia - |444). Who should be trausferred por the admitustrative aufhority to i^isfer is vitiated by mala fide pr is ^ny guidelines or rules fhe Courts wifh it. In Union of Jndia & kth <fe mwther 12004} 4 SCC 245, itwas observed as foUows: "Ifo Govermn undertaking has a| any one pccrticutm trcmsfer ofapartic\ or category of trc^ another is not on sennce, necessary} in the public adl^ transfef is show^ exercise or sfafet provisions prohibitf ihe Tribunals noii orders as a mattei\ appellate authoritit that of fhe empld^ order passed i}\ exigencies of fhe highKghted by thi^ Pou»crCorpn. Lt^. 574. ^<-iTrt<Tl'rf <i?*inT^T'f^l'£l'(HSl^l't ^aif^Haii^T °n( servant or employee of a public ly legcil right to be posted forever at place or ptace of his choioe since ilaremployee appointed to theclciss nsferaWe posts from one place to- ly an inddent, but a condition of too in public interest and effidency tinisiration. Urdess an order of to be an outcojne of nw.la-fide to be in violation of statutory ng any such trcmsfer, the Courts or mally cannof inferfere wifh such ofroutine, as though they were the substituting their qwn Sedsionfor lee/TnanageTnent, as against such the interest of ^ad.rmrusirative 'm'ce concemed. TTife posiiion was Court in NeCU.onal Hydroelectric -Vs- Shri Bhatiwew (2001)8 SCC './". f^ : »s» XI-HC-78 *it*trtiapTn^ \j-ccr-?qraicit|,yiflwf<s,fio)i<Hly< ^•K'-ftSff.^^ .-•'.: • 30 3ii^»rwft'ii'i» raii$?rri>*-ii<*> ( \M 3IT^9Tqg%('?qfg^S) W^200$ Leamed couiisel for tt specific grounds on the basis transfer qf petitioner has be< is vitiated'for fhesaid reasoni .,.,;•:;;; la .view of^the fact thati froia pne office at Raipur tc tliere is no change of place pietitioner is holdiag a traas dated 12.9.2005 does not pi position and it does not sho the aufhorities or passing of Qfaay statutory rules, I ara oftpansfer in fhis writ petitio The petition has no Imune. Coasequenfly, M.W.P.: relief stands disposed of. ^ <nt<)1«rfll<1!*1c>l"^'fel3) 'lRI'tdK ^srt^Han^sT • (.e petitioner could aot point out aay ofwhich it can be asstuned fhat fhe |n affected by mala-fide aad tlie same |the petitioner has been IpcaUy shifted fhe head Qffice at Raipur itsetf and afnd ftu-ther in viewofthe fact that the ferable post and the inipugned order ^t fhe petitioner to a disadvaat^eous |w either aay mala-fide on fhe part of |£heorder in contra.vention or violation tot inclined to iaterfere with this order ^i fited by the petitioner. Inerit aad the same is disnussed iii o.3794/2005 for grant of ad_intenm Sd/- SunilKumarSinha " Judge ^•c