RESPONDENTS HIGH GOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WntPeilltion<8)No.08of2008 A.K. Verma, S/Q Late Shri J.P. Verma, aged about 55 years, occupation-service, presently working as Trauung Supermtendent in Industrial Trainmg Institute, Premnagar under the Department of Technical Education Manpower Plamring, Science & Technology ofthe State ofChhattisgarh, R/6 Near I.T.I Building Prenmagar, Tahsil Surajpur District Surguja (CG). ^7ERSUS 1. State ofClihattisgarh fhrough Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Manpower Planning, Science & Technology, Mantralaya, DKS Bhavan, Raipur(CG). 2. Director, Emplo^'ment & - Tra.ming, State of Chhattisgarh, Byi-bn Bazar, Raipur (CG). 3. Principal, ladustrial Trainmg Institute, Ambikapur, District Surguja (CG). . 4. Principal, Industrial Training Institute, Bilaspur :(CG). ^ 5. R.A. Ansari, S/o not kaown to the petitioner,aged- not known to the petitioner, Occupation-Service presently working as Training Superintendent in Industrial Trauung Institute under the Department of Technical Education, Manpower Planning, Scieace & Technology of fhe State of Chhattisgarh, R/o Industrial Traming Institute, Koni, Bilaspur (CG). (WEIT PETmON XJNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTmjHON OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'MeMr. SatishK. Aenihotri, J.) Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, Advocate forfhe petitioner. Shri U.N.S. Deo, Govemment Advocate for the State/respondent No. lto4. ^K 2. (Passedon4ofJanuary, The petitioner, vvho was working as Training Superintendent in Industrial Training Institute, Premnagar, was transferred to Industrial Traimag Institute, Korba by order dated 27.06.2007 (Aimexure P/l). The respondent No. 5 was traasferred from Bilaspur to Premnagar at the place ofpetitioner. According to leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner, the resppndent No. 5 did notjdinlfae place ofpostmg at Premnagar and also -^ 4. 5, ^K fhe petitioner was not relieved to join his new place of posting despite several represerrtations to the authorities. The respondent No. 5, thereafter, for non compliance pfthe order, was imposed penalty of withholding ofone increment and consequently the transfer order ofthe petitioner fi'om Premnagar to Korba vis-a-vis respondent No. 5 (from Bilaspur to Premnagar) was eancelled by order dated 17.12.2007 (Annexure P/6). As a result, the petitioner remained at Premaagar and the respondent No. 5 remained at Bilaspiir. Leamed counsel for the petitioner challenges fhe impugned order dated 17.12.2007 on the groiuids fhat the cancellation ofthe transfer order is on the ground ofmalafide exercise ofpowers, as flie respondent No. 5 was punished for not obeying the order, and thereafter, the transfer order ofthe petitioner as well as respondent No. 5, was cancelled. Haviag heard leamed counsel for the parties, it is evident that the petitioner has not acquired aiiy right to challenge the transfer order dated 27.06.2007. In fact fhe petitioner was never ti-ansferred as the petitioner was not relieved from his original place of posting i.e. Premnagar, and thereafter, the transfer order was cancelled on 17.12.2007, I do not understaad how the petitioner has suffered with the transfer order when the petitioner was never relieved and has not joined his new place ofposting. The petitioner has not made out any case on other pemiissible ground i.e. non competence ofthe officer or violafion of aiiy statutory rules and regulations. The petitioner has failed to make out a case on merit on the ground of strong malafide. Thus, there is no merit in this petition, 'aceordingly the petition is dismissed. No order asto costs. Sd/- . . SatishK.Agmhotn Judge t'SS 11:1 B:S!: ^ii fc!