Singls 8®nch IN THE HIGH COURT OF TUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH PETITIONER W.F. N0. _ 4-T83 /2004 Sheikh Ramjan Hussein, Aged about 54 years, S/o. Sheikh Afazal Hussein, R/ o. Kandagaon; Tahsilpara, Kondagaon, Distt Bastar (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDE]^[r[€~l;..^^lfl StateofChhattisgarh .^•^" VS-'^' ^. Throueh SeGretarv, F ?-"^^'^..--Y':l>t ^^ Through SeGretary, Forest Deparfment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG.) AB9'" ^ \ Forest ConsCTvator, Kanker, DistfcBastar(C.G.) ,^' 3] ^ o Divisional Forest Officer, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) % -fv.^? ^IT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA ^s HIGHCOURT OF CHHAmSGARHAT BILASPUR W.P. No.47^<rf2004 Petitioner Sheikh Ramjan Hussein Versus' Respondents StateofChhatUsgarh&othere SB: Hon'bte Mr. Justfce Satish K. Agnihotri, J Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate forthe petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for the respondsnts/State. ORDER (Passed on this 23rd day of February, 2007) Ths foliowing order of the Court is passed by Satish K. Agnihotri.J. 1. The petitioner while working as Forester, at Kondagaon, Mulmuia Rangev/asfransferredteKawardhaDMsJon.oniiiesametermsand condittens vkle jmpugned fransfer ordsr dated 10.11.2004 (Annewire P/3). Thakur 2. This Court vide interim order dated 14.1.2005 directed Uiat not to give effecttc the transfsrorder, if 8is petittoner v/as not already rslieved. 3. Be that as it iriay.withthepassageofBme this petftion has become infructuous as period oftransfer is not applicabte forever. At ttiis point of tims Iftere is no question te examineths varidify oftheh'ansfer order. However.the respondents are at libsrty to pass apprepriate orders keeping in view ths pubik; interest and administraSve exigene/, without insisting on complianGe of ffie earlier transferorder. 4. It is well seffled principte of law that transfer is an incident of senrice and it is for the employer to cfecide as to where a parfcular officer/employee be posted keeping in view pubiic intsrest as wetl as administrative exigency. This Court has lim'rted jurisdiction to interfere in the transfer matter andthis Courtcan interfere on!y in the caseof proved malafide, non-competence of authority passing the transfsr order and franster order not being in conftirmlty with the rules and regulations. 5. In view of the above, ttiis petitton stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- SatishK-Agnihotri Judge