HIGH COURT OF THE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha & Hon'ble Shri R.L. Jhanwar. JJ. APPELLANT PETJTIONER RESPONDENTS W.A.No.316of2009 M.S. Raghuvanshi, Aged about 54 years, S/o Shri R.S. Raghuvanshi, posted as Tahsildar, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.) Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Generaf Administration, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3. Collector, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) 4. Shri Pushpendra Sharma posted as Tahsildar, Tahsii Pamgarh, Djstrict Janjgir Champa (C.G.) 5. Chhattisgarh State Election Commission, through the Commissioner, Mahanadi Khand, Mantralaya Premises, Raipur \^'^~ fWrit Appeal under Section 2 ofthe Chhattisaarh Hiah Court fAppeaf to Division Benchl Act. 2006) Appearance: Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate for the appellanVpetitioner. Mr. U.N.S. Deo, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents 1 to 3. Ms. Sunita Jain, Advocate for respondent No.4. W.A. No. 316 of2009 i^ -\ ORDER (30.10.2009) SUNILKUMARSINHA.J. (1) Heard on admission. (2) Being aggrieved with the order dated 7th of October, 2009 passed in W.P.(S) No. 5210/2009 by the learned Single Judge of this Court, the appellanVpetitioner has filed this writ appeal. (3) The facts, briefly stated, are as under:- The appellant/petitioner was posted as Tahsildar, Bagicha. He was also appointed as Assistant Registration Officer for preparation of electoral roll for the elections of local bodies. By an order dated 30th June, 2009 (Annexure-P/1 in the writ petition), the appellant was transferred from Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur to District Bastar. This order was challenged by the appellant in W.P.(S) No. 3403/2009. The said writ petition came up for hearing before the learned Single Judge of this Court on 13.7.2009. On the said date. the petition was disposed of with a direction to the appellant to make a representation to the respondents authorities within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of the copy ofthe said order and it was also directed that the said representation would be decided within a period of 3 weeks from the date of its receipt. The learned Single Judge further directed that till then the order of transfer dated 30.6.2009 shall not be given effect to. In compliance of the said order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court, the appellant made a representation dated 23.7.2009. The said representation was decided by the concerned authority on 21.8.2009 and the representation of the appellant was rejected. It appears that while deciding the said representation, the concerned authority has given persona! hearing to the appellant and then has taken the view that the case of the appellant does not require any re-consideratEon. After passing of the aforesaid order of the rejection of the representation, the appellant again filed W.P.(S) No. 5210/2009 in which the impugned order has been passed by the learned Single Judge on 7th of October, 2009. '€y^!"^ ilte^. ' 'i^s^ /Jj W.A. No. 316 of2009 (4) Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellanVpetitioner, argues that the appellant has been transferred in a very short period from Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur to District Bastar. He also argues that since the appellant was engaged in election work, therefore, according to the circular dated 1 July, 2009, he should not have been transferred from his present place of posting. (5) The learned Single Judge has dealt with the above arguments in the impugned order and has held that the aforesaid circular and the transfer policy in which the period ete. regarding stay of a Government servant are defined are not controlled by statutory provisions or under some provisions of the Constitution, therefore, the effect thereof would be of advisory in character and no legal rights are conferred upon the emptoyee under the said documenVpolicy. (6) On due consideration of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellanVpetitioner and further observing the settied principle that the transfer is an incidence of sen/ice, no government sen/ant working on a transferable post can make his claim for posting at a particular place and further that unless the order of transfer is shown to be vitiated by malafides or extraneous considerations or it is shown to be passed against any statutory Rule or the Act, normally such orders are not to be interfered with by a Court of law, we are of the opinion that present is not a fit case in which the order passed by the learned Singte Judge should be interfered with. (7) The appeal has no merit, the same is liable to be dismisssd and is hereby dismissed at the motion stage itself. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge vatti