r HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETmONER RESFONDENTS W,P..CS)No. 7626 of2007 Maniklal Sahu, S/o Late Ghanaram Salai, aged about 40 years, occupation Assistant Teacher, Govt. Girls Hi^ier Secondary Sehool, Moharibhata, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (CG). VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarii, tlu-ou^i Secretary, DepattenCTt of School Educatitm, DKS Bhawan, Raipur(CG). 2. Collector, Mahasamund (CO). 3. Block Educaticai OfiReer, Kock Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (CG). 4. District Education QEGeer, District Mahasamund (CG). (WWT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA) (SK: Hon'Me Mr. Sattsh K. Asnihotri. J.) Present : ShriR^eevShrivastava,Advocatefwthepetiticuier. Shri 8.K. Midn-a, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORALORDER (Passed on 2ml Day ofJanuary, 2008) 1. The petitkuier is aggrieved by order dated 21.07.2007 (Aimexure P/l), whereby, the petitioner has been transferred from Pre Secondary Giris School, Mahasamimd to Primary School Raital, BagbAara, District Mahasamund, by tfae District Education Oifficer, Mahasamund. It is sut»nitted that this order has been passed to place the petitioner at Bagbahara, Disfaict Mdiasacnind. 2. The sole contention of fhe petitioner is that the petitioner made a representation to the auttiority and the Blodc Education Qfficer, Mdiasamiuid, has passed tfae relieving order (Annexure P/7) vwlfaout waiting for tfae decisi<n on the representation made by the petitioner. 3. Be that as it may, the representation is not a statutoiy rejMiesentation, tinis, tfaere is ao question for waitit^ for the decision on the rep-esentaticm. Even otfaerwise.transfer is an incident ofservice and this court can not iaterfere /. in the transfer matter wtdcb has been made in adtnuustrative exigency in public interest. 4. It is well settled that tfae transfer order can be interfere onlv in case of lack of competence of tbe officer passing the onler of transfer, violation of statutory provisions and malafide. The petition is not based on any yound as above-stated. 5. Thus, there is no merit in the petition, and accordingly, petition is dismissed. 6. Disniissal ofthis petiti<m may not come in the way ofconsideration oflhe representation ofthe petitioner pending before the authority. Sd/- \ Satish K. Agnihotn Judge 7. Sain