i§§¥3gia aengh IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR F w.p.tsmo. “11" /2o11 W, PETITIONER : Ku. Ganesh Khande, D/o Shri Paras Ram Khande, aged about 38 years, working as Staff Nurse, at Civil Hospital Kharsiya, R/o Ratan Mahka, : K State of Chhattisgarb- Through :— The Secretary, Health Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. ‘/ Collector, Raigarh Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. Post Ghaghra, Tahsil Kharsiya, Distt. — Raigarh (C. G.) VERSUS HIGH COI FRT OF CH H ATTISGARH AT BU ASPY ‘rR WRIT PE'ITI‘ION (S) N0, 4224 of 2011 ?ET1’1‘IONER : Ku‘ Ganesh Khande. VER SI J S RESPONDENTS State of Chhat‘tisgarh & mother. WRIT PETITION LNDER ARTICLE 226 OF ’IHE CONSTITUTION OF INDXA {x SB: Hon’hle Shri Satish K. Agnihotri. J. Present: Shri N.K.Chatterjee, Advocate for the petitioner. Shm' S.K.Mi$in‘a, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. 0 R I) E R \x (Ehssed on w‘Wtember, 201 1) 1, Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 15.072011 (Annexure P/l) whereby, the petitioner, working (w StaffNurse at Civil Hospital, Kharsiya, has ' boon tramferred to Communiiy Health Centre: Kapu; on administrative gmunds. 2i The main contention of the leamed counsel for the petitioner is ihat the transfer of the petitioner is Violative of the circular dated 24061996 wherein it. is provided that. the office bearers of the recognized Union viz. i’resident, Secretarv and Treasurer shall not be transferred when they are holding the post for two terms Qhn Chatierjee lilrther submits that. the sisters of the petitioner are deoendent on her and if she is transferred from her present place of posting, they will have to face difficulties, He further submits that at. Civil Hospital? Kharsiyai there are ll posts of staff nurse but. only 5 are working at present. Thus, it would not. be justified to transfer the petitioner from her present. place ofposting; 3, On perusal of the circular dated 24.06.1996, it is clear that the immunity granted to the President. Secretary and Treasurer of the Union for not. transferring them for two terms have been moditied to the extent that only the President and a Secretary have been exempted hom transfer. and that too. only for a period of three yearsAdrnittedly, the petitioner is holding the post of Treasurer and she is not. protected under the aforesaid circulari So far as §7 vacancy of post. at Civil Hospitai, Kharsiya, i$ concerned, it is for the State Govemment to post. a panicular employee lOoking to the urgoncy and requirement at other places also. The petitioner has not challenged the impugned transfer order on any other penniesible legal ground ie. violation of any statulory rules or regulations or lack of competence of the omcer, passing the impugned order. It is also well~sertled that transfer is an incidence of service and it is for the employer to decide asto where a. particular o§icer/ employee be posted: keeping in View public; interest. as well as administrative exigency. This Com? has limited jurisdiction to 'mlerfere with the transfer mailer except in the cases of proved mala fide; non-competence of authority passing the transfer order and not being in conformity with the rules and regulations. The petitioner/mployee cannot. be pennitled to remain at. one place forever, Under the provisions of service rules: employer has all the powers to post an employee at a particular place in View of public interest, administrative exigency. (See ERRoyqzaDa v. State 0f Ta} i Nadu and anather" , Uniorz 0f India and amt/fer v. Jaeardhan Debama’z & anotherz, Sta e 0f MP. and another SSKOWW and others} and Mohd. MasoedAhmad v. late ofUP. :i Otherf)‘ In View of the above, the petition is devoid of merit. and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/-' Satish K. AgnihOtri Judge w i (1974) 4 soc 3 : (2004) 4 scc 245 j (1 995;. a soc 27o * (2mm a sec 159