^^g^'^G-a- C-Ffoo i^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S)NO. s-l»9 /2006 PETITIONER ^e/ ^v..<^~7-^'°..- ^•••;^;^--'' -Y%^ / 0<.'-\^.-< -..•-'''3<J>' <s^''< •^'''.y ..-•'" ^y^ !'<^y •<y- RESPONDENTS SMT. K. PAL aged about 40 years, S/o Shri Ashok Kumar Pal R/o. Power House Zone-1 Market Khurshipar, Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) VERSUS :1. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Through : Secretary General Administrative Department Mantralaya D.K.S., Bhawan , Raipur (C.G.) Z. THE COLLECTOR Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) *^'3,. CHIEF WIEDICAL OFFICER ^ ~ Durg, District Durg (C.G.) BLOCK MEDICAL OFFICER Patan, District Durg (C.G.) SIVIT. BHOJ SAHU Health Worker Sub-Health Centre Pendri Tarai District Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION U/A 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF^NDIA ^'~ r S •t vmmiiwe^a^'srfsffSssssShitSI^W"^'-^^^^^'- B- HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 5119 of 2006 Petitioner: Smt. K. Pat Versus Respondents: State of Chhattisgarh & othei-s Sin^e Bench: HonTile Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri H. V. Sharma, Advocate for ttie petitioner. Shri Arvind Dubey, Panel lawyer for the Respondents No. 1 to 4. None for the respondent. No.5. ORDER ( 20dl September, 2006) The foUowiag order offhe Court is passed by Satish K. Agnihotri, J. 1. The petitioner, who is a Feiaale Health Worker, bas filed fhis petition wifh the piayer to quash tbe traasfer order dated 7.7.2006 (Annexure P/ 1), whereby she has been traasferred fiioin Sub-Prunaiy Health Centre, Puraina (Pataa), District- Durg to Pendri Tarai, Primaiy Healfh Center, Kandsara, District - Durg. 2. The only contention i-aised by leanied counsel for the petitioner is fhat tiie petitioner has been transferred froin the present place of posting to adjust the respondent No.5, wbo has been transferred vide order dated 7.7.2006 (Annexure P/3), at Sub-Primaiy Health Centre, Puraina (Patan), District- Durg, on her own request. I do not find any inerit ia fhe arguinenf. of leamed coiuisel for the petitioner. 3. It is well settled principle of law that traasfer is an incident of semce and it is for the einployer to decide as to where a particular officer/einployee be posted keeping in view public r .^%^.. --s-,; 2 2-f •g interest as weU as adnunistratjye ex^ency. This Coiu-t has limited jurisdictiou to interfere in the transfer niatter and this Coilrt can interfere onfy in fhe case of proved inala&de, non-coinpetence of authority passing fhe traasfer orier and transfer order not beins in confonnity with the rules and regulations. None of the above grouiids are availabte to the petitioner. 4. Ia view of fhe foregoing, fhe petition is disinissed. No order as to costs. §d/- SatishK.Agnihotn Judge Thakur •Sfc.