^WWSSSKSSIWSWW! M HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (8} No.8669/2006 ChonhaS Toppo, Son of Late Shri Dhaa Masih, aged about 42 years, Working as a Lab Techiuciaa, Govt. Polytechiiic CoUege, Ainbikapiir, District Suiyija (C.G.), Resident of Polytechnic Colony, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) Secretary, Teclmical Bhawan, State of Chliatdsgarh, Through : The Departinent of Education, D.K.S. Raipur. The Director, Departiaent of Tectinical Education, Raipur(C.G.) The Principal, Govt. Polytechiiic CoUege, Auibikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) OF INDIA Shri V.K. Pandey, Counsel for tlie petitioner. Shri A.S. Kachhwaha, Govt. Advocate for fhe State/ respondents. >*JLV«. .J. Heard. The petitioner, who is workiiig ou the post ofLab Technician, was transferred froni Govemzaent Polytechnic CoUege, Ambikapur to Govemraent Polytechiiic CoUege, Takhatpur by order dated 7/7/2006 on adniinistrative grounds. W.P. No. (S) 5669 of2007 1' While hearing fhis Writ Petition on 30.10.2006, this Court directed that the status quo, as obtained on 30.10.2006, shaU be inaintaiaed tUl furttier orders. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submits fhat the petitioner was noiniaated as fhe Secretary of Scheduled Castes aiid Scheduled Tribes Officers & Eniployees Union (AJAKS), District Surguja, thei^fore, on tihe basis ofvarious circulars ofthe soveraruent, his traasfer should not have been effected. The returu has been filed ui fhis case. Vide para 11 of ttie return, Goveminent has taken stand fhat tlie petitioner was touisferred vide order dated 07.07.2006 and at that tune, fhe petitioner was not noiniaated as fhe Secretary of Scheduled Castes aiid Scheduled Tribes Officers & Einployees Union (AJAKS), District Sarg~uja. However, he was nomiaated szibsequentty and the aiiswering respondent had no inibrmation about fhe said noinination. The petitioner was traa.sferred purely on adniiaista-ative grounds aad wifhout aay uialice, fherefore, aU adverse allegations raised by fhe petitioner are denied by the State. It is weU setfled prmciples of law fhat transfer is an iacidence of service and it is for fhe einployer to decide as to where a particular oflicer/eniployee be posted keeping iu view pubUc interest as weU as adTninistrative exigency. The Court has luaited jurisdiction to taterfere with the transfer inatter aud ttois Court caa taterfere only in case of proved inalafide, extraneous consideration, non-coinpeteuce of aufhority passing fhe transfer order and trausfer order not beiilg iu conforinity wifh fhe rules, regulations and fhe Act, if aay. Be that as it inay, for fhe present, as atoout 1 year 3 inonfhs has ah-eady elapsed after passing of fhe iatenm order of status quo on 30.10.2006 aad it is stated by leanied counsel for the petitioner that fhe petitioner is stiU continuiag at Govemment Polytechnic ^'^^•s^s^^ W.P. No. fS) 5669 of2007 CoUege, Ambikapur, therefore, it is not necessary to examine the vaUdity offhe transfer order at this stage. In view of the foregoing reasons, fhis petition stands disposed of as having become mfi-uctuous. However, in fhe facts of the case, it is expected tihat fhe State/respondents shall not iusist upon corupliance of the order dated 7/7/2006. Needless to say fhat ftie respoudents are at liberty to pass appropriate orders ia fhe public interest aad adniuiistrative ex^encies. -— Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge