@ BEFORE THE M.P. STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BENCH RATPUR x ) / \) z/ M @J T O.A. NO. /2001 Ag/ APPLICANT TR DEWANGAN, S/O Late Ram Prasad Dewangan, age 50 years, Revenue Inspector, R/O Before RDA. Colony, Tikrapara, Raipur VERSUS NON-APPLICANT State of Chhattisgaxh through the Secretary Revenue Depanment, 1 D.K.S. Bhawm Raipur 2. The Collector, Land Records, Raipur (C.G.) Lilaram Sahu, Revenue Inspector, Raipur - Distt. Raipur ORIGINAL APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE M.P. STATE ADIVIINISTR ATIVF. TRTRI NAT . ACT IQRS HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP. (S) No. 3794 of 2005 Petitioner T. R. Dewangan Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & owers SB: Hon‘ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri, J 4“ , $hri A. K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. V. V. S. Munhy, Deputy Advocate Genefal with Smt. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the respondenmlsmte. 0 R D E R (Passed on this 9‘“ day of March, 2007) The following order of the Court is passed by Satish K. Agnfhotri, J. 1. The petitioner while working as Revenue Inspector at Raipur was transferred to Rajim. on the same terms and conditions vide impugned order dated 10.8.2001 (Annexure N1). 2. The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Raipur vide interim order dated 18.9.2001 directed to keep in abeyance the impugned transfer order, titi the next date. By virtue of the interim order the petitioner is working at the original place of posting. 3. Be that as it may, with the passage of time this petition has become infructuous as period of transfer is ‘not applicable forever. At this point of time there is no question to examine the validity of the transfer order. However. the respondents are at liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view the public interest and administrative exigency. without insisting on comptiance of the impugned transfer order. lt is well settled principle of law that transfer is an incident of service and it is for the employer to decide as to where a particular weer/employee be posted. keeping in View public interest as well as administrative exigency. This Court has limited iurisdiction to interfere in the transfer matter and this Court can interfere only in the case of proved malafrde. non-competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the rules and regulations. In view of the above. this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. . k 1W Sd/— r‘ Satjsh K. Agnihotri Judge Thakur t i . .