P ! (^3 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTtSGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.fS) No. 3870 of 2005 PetiBoner Smt. Savita Pathak, W/o Shri SushB Pathak, aged about 32 years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Mudhapar, Distt. Korba (ChhatUsgarh) Versus Respondents 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, School Education Deparbnent, D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur 2. Director, Public Instruclions, Chhattfsgarh, Pension Bada, Raipur 3. Distt. Education Offlcer, Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.) 4. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Devetopment Depalrtment, Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.) SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri, J Shri Manoj Kumar Dubey, Advocate for ttie petitioner. Siiri Sushil Dubey, Govt. Advocate for the respondenls/Sfate. ORDER (Passed on this 16 day of March, 2007) The foilowing order of <he Court is passed by Satlsh K. Agnihotri, J. 1. The petitioner whlte worldng as Assistant Teacher at Govt. Primary Schoot, Mudhapar, District- Korba was transferred to Mkldle School, Kurudih, on the same terms and conditions, vide impugned order datedl 1.9.2001 (Annexure A/4). 2. The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunat at Raipur vkle interim order dated 18.10.2(%)1 directed to maintain status quo in r^ard to ttie position of ttie petitioner as was prevailing on 6.10.2(X)1. By virtue of the interim order the petitioner is continuing at the original place of posBng. 3. Be that as it may, with the passage of Cme ttiis petition has become infructuous as period of transfer is not applicable forever. At thfs point of time there is no quesdon to examine the valid'rty of the transfer ^ii v • 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 fransfer order. 4. It is vreil settled principle of law that transfer is an incidsnt of service and it is for the employer to decide as to where a parijcular ofRcer/emptoyee be posted, keeping in wew public interest as well as administratfve'exigency. This Court has limited jurisdiction to interfere with the transfer matter and this Court can entertain judicial review only in the case of proved malafide. non-competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with She rules and r^utations. 5. In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Amit