. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Wm Fetiiion (3) No. 1281 of 2008 Sudhir Kumar Sharaf, aged about 47 years, S/o. Kunj Bihari Sharaf at present working asa Biock ‘ Educatian omc'er, Baloda, Tahsu Baioda, District Janjgir—Champa (CG). Versus State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary Schoo! Educaticn Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(CG). he Director, Directed of Public instruction in ' front of Education Board, Pension Bada‘, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). District Education Officer, Janigir, District Janjgir— Champa (CG). PL. Koushik Lecturer DIET Janjgir, District Jani'r-Chamoa (Chhatti’sgarh), Respondents ,z (Writ Petition under Articte 226 of the Constitution of india SB: Hon’bte Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J. r :y Present: Shri Vishnu Kostha, counsel for the petitioner. i Shri U.N,S. 'Deo, Govt. Advocatetorthe State. Shri Amrito Dee, counsei for the respondent No.4. Shri Aswani Shukia, counsei for the Caveator. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 23‘” February,2ooe) By this petition, the petitioner chaitenges the validity of the order dated 13-2—2008 (Annexure Pl’i 0) and 21—2—2008 (Annexure P/11‘}; whereby the petitioner has been transferred as Block Education Ohicer, Baioda to the office of the District Education Officer, Janjgir. 2) On perusai of the impugned orders dated 13—2-2008 (Annexure PltO) and 1—2-2008 (Annexure Pitt), it appears that one GR. Chandra fiied a petition being rit Petitien (S) M16062 of 2007 in this Court im‘pugning hie tranefer order. This ourt, after hearing the petitioner, granted iiberty to Mr. GR. Chandra to make a ?etiticner T ig ) 2 W C p representation in View 0f Clause 7 of the Transfer Poiicy dated 13-8-2007 i0 consider ‘the case 0f Mr. GR. Chandra, on merit. Ciause 7 of the Transfer Policy provides for pasting of ah empioyee on his choice in the iast year before his retirement. The State Government, after having considered the representation of Mr. GR. Chandra. paseeci the impugned order, whereby certainadjustmente/repiaoemen‘ts have been made. The petitioner is not oniy a person, who has been transferred, but other persons nameiy Shri PL. Kaushik and Shri U.C. Nayak have aiso been transferred. it appears that in order to give effect to the transfer poiicy or to faciiitate Mr. GR. Chandra to remain on a place ofrhis choice inrthe iast year before his retirement, these transfers have been made and the petitioner has also been/effected by the transfer order. The petitioner was transferred as Biock Education Officer, Baioda to the office of the District Education Officer, Janjgir, within the same district. 3) it is weii settied principie of law that transfer is an incident of sen/ice and it is for the employer to decide as to where a particular, ofhcer/empioyee be posted keeping inrview pubiic interest as well as administrative exigency. Jhis Court has iimiteo‘ jurisdiction to interfere in the transfer matter and this Court can interfere oniy in the case of proved mala fide non-competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity With the ru es and reguiations The petitioneriempioyee cannot ber permitted to remain at once place forever by court/ orders. 4) The petitioner has not made out any case for intereference by this Court in the present transfer. 5) For the reasons stated hereinabove and as a result. this petition is dismissed. summarily. Consequently, l.A.No.’l stands disposed of. Raju