X BEFORE THE HON‘BLE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BENCH AT RAIPUR ( CHEATTI‘SGARH) o-ANO¢ 200 DoNdroi son of Shri Hemnath Yogi. u 5/5) \ 2%‘Mw Asstt. Teahher, Middle School par_Ras' W; Balod . Distt. Burg (C.G.) . . ~ AppliCant a vs. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secret ary» hool Educ ation Department. Mantralaya, D.K.S.Bhawan . Raipur (Chhattisgarh) .= 2 . Director . Public Instruction. Qahatti sgarh, Pension Bada’ Raipur’ (coGc) o 3. District Education Officer, trict Durg (chhattisgarh) . .o‘. Non applicants TRIBUNAL ECT 198 5 t g Sc Dis HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP. {S} No. 3785 of 2005 Petitioner D. N. Yogi Versus Respondents sate of Chhauisgarh & others SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri, J The following order of the Court is passed by Satish K. Agnihotri, J. 1. ORDER (Passed on this 9‘“ day or March, 2007) The petitioner while working as Assismnt Teacher in Middle School, Par- Ras. Balod. District - Durg was transferred to Middle School. Malgaon. Balod. on the same terms and conditions vide impugned order dated 6.9.2001 (Annexure N1). The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Raipur vide interim order dated 20.9.2001 directed to maintain status quo in regard to the position of the petitioner as it was prevailing on 13.9.2001. By virtue of the interim order the petitioner is working at the original place of posting. 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 compliance 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 offrcer/empioyee 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 malafide. non-competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the rules and regulations. ln view of the above. this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Thakur ~ sw— :‘l Satish K. Agnihotri Judge i. it P Shri Anupam Dubey, Advocate for the petitioner. V. V. S. Munhy, Deputy Advocate General with Smt. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State.