WJ>. ffiVMo.^61 ^20£» Petitioner Rajkumar Patel, S/o•.——-, Assidant Tsacher, Primary School, frUpari, Block- Batod, Dlstrict (Durg - C.G.) Versus Respondente 1. State <rf Chhattisgarh, Thpough Secretary. School Education D^artment, D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur 2. District Educatfon Officer, Durg, Disfrict- Durg (ChhatBsgartt) SB: Hon'bte Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihofri, J Shri Y. C. Sharma, Advocate for the pefitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Govt. Advocate for Uie respondente/State. ORDER (Passed on this 1^" day of March, 2007) The foltowing order of the Court is passed by Satish K. Agnihofri, J. 1. The petitioner white working as Assistant Teacher at Primary Schoot, Nipani, Block - Balod, Districl- Dwg was transferred to Primary Girts School, Armari Kate (Gurur), on the same terms and condiUons, vide impugned orderdated 6.9.2001 (Annexure A/1). 2. The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunat at Raipur vtde interim order dated 17.10.2001 cfirected to maintein stahts quo in regard to the posiBon of e petifioner as was prevailing on 5.10.2001. By virtue of the interim ordsr 8ie petitioner is confinuif^ at 8ie original plwe of posfing. 3. Be that as it may, with the passage of Cme this peBUon has become infructuous as period of transfer is not appticabte forever. At this point of time ftere is no quesGon to examine <he validity of the transfer order. However, the respondents are at liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view the public interest and administraUve exigency, without insisUng on comptiance ofthe impugned transfer orcter. •^& asss Bii f]^° 4. !t is well settted principte of law that transfer is an incident <rf servfee and it is for the employer to decide as to where a particular officer/employee be posted, keeping in view publlc interest as well as administrative exigency. This Court has timited jurisdiction to interfere with the transfer matter and this Court can entertain judicial review only in the case of proved matafide, non-competenee of authorfty passing the transfer order and transfer ordsr not being in conformify vsnth tti® rutes and reguiations. 5. In view of the above, this petitton stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Amit Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge