IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAI'IGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G._) WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 6Tg I OF 2006 PETITIONER / R. S. Dhruv, aged about 58 years Son of Shri Manjan Singh Dhruv, Working as an Additional Regional Ambikapur, Transport Officer, District Surguja (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS : / 1. State of Chhattisgarh, hrough: The ' Secreta ry, The Special Secretary, Department of Transport, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). he Commissioner, Transport, Raipur (C.G.). The Collector, Ambikapur District Surguja (C.G.). Shri S. K. Kanwar, Deputy Regionai Transport Officer, Regional ' Transport Office, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2§6 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS, PROHIBITION ........................... ETC TS T XI—HC—78 @ EW,WE,W ' ma.w..é.%'zx.... WW a1 200a Wm (13W) mmw WWW WW§WW WWW $WW 11.1 2.2006 Mr. Manindra Shrivastava with Mr. V.K. Pandey, Iearned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. V.V.S. Murthy, learned Addl. A.G. with Ms. Sunita Jain, learned P.L. for the State/respondents No. 1 to 4. Mr. P.P. Sahu, learned counslel appearing for respondent No. 5 on caveat. Heard on admission. The petitioner is Additional Regional Transport OfHcer presently posted at Additional Regional Tran port Office, Ambikapur. He has been transferred to Regional Tran port Office, Jagdalpur vide order dated 24.1 1 .2006 of Annexure P/1. The petitioner has challenged the above order by way of this p ition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia. Learned counsel for the pet tioner submits that the petitioner ‘ has joined at the present place of posting vide his joining report of Annexure P/3 on 15.10.2003 as pe transfer order dated 10.10.2003. As per transfer policy for the year 006-07 (Annexure P/4) generally transfers are to be effected between 1" June 2006 and 30 th June 2006 and there is a total ban of transfer a er 30‘“ June 2006 and transfer, if P.T.O. XI—HC—78 ..ooo....¢.oo HW,W§,W . lN‘P'CS7 ég9/ o.oo...‘o Ea 200C WWW WWW mmwm ‘2~ WW§WW > éawm r any, couid be effected only after obt: aining concurrence from the Chief Minister by the Secretary. it is submitted that the above transfer order has been passed during the affect the education of the childre transfer order is aiso bad as the petii superannuation on 30.7.2008 and tl the tinaiization of his retrial benefits: .haii become difficuit. On the other hand, Mr. V.V.S State/respondents No. 1 to 4 and appearing for respondent No. 5 on c the order of transfer (Annexure P/1 ), respondent No. 5 has already been relieved and has given his joini g at his transferred place. mid session and the same shail n of the petitioner. The above ioner shail be attaining the'age of ierefore, by virtue of this transfer . Murthy, learned counsel for the Mr. P.P. Sahu, learned counsel aveat submit that in pursuance of l have heard learned counsel or the parties. So far as violation of transfer policy and transfer during the ban periodis concerned, the norms en nciated by the Government in the matter of regulating transfer is mere in the nature of guidelines for the purpose of guidance of its officers and the same does not vest the Wm (W) P.T.O. —— XI—HC-78 $a:mmwmya#WWEJ%angt, ‘. //'C5) ‘ WW (13W) mam mw&wm mma§m§m$ aRmRa%aa@a ‘3~ %a wa@w ‘ m 200 Q concerned Government officer any immunity against his transfer arder. Considering the fact that the petitioner has been transferred after completion of three years of his tenure and further considering ~ that the transfer is an incident of service, no case is made out for nterference against the transfer order under writ jurisdiction. The , petition deserves to be dismissed at the admission stage itself and it is accordingly dismissed. ‘ Sd/- Dhirendra MiShra ‘ Judge 3y, I P.T.o.