' Q3 swam 3mm IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P.(S) No. §905 /2011 t/ PETITIONER : Kheman Lal, S/o Late Shri Samrath, aged about 4O years, R/o Village Bhandera, Tahsil Dondi Lohara, Distt. Durg (C.G.) working as a Driver in the District Hospital Durg (CG.) VERSUS s RESPONDENTS : 1./ State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary Health and Family Welfare, Officer, Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA W 099) Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) (K, Pg ”a 2. Director Health Services, Eated Chhattisgarh Rajpur (C.G.) 3. The Collector, Durg Distt. Durg (C.G.) f. 4. Chief Medical and Health M HIGH C01 IRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT EH IASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 5905 0f2011 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’hle Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri B.P.Singh7 Advocate f‘or the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the Slate/respondents. 0 R D F. R (Passed on 30‘“ day of September, 201 1) The petitioner impugns the order dated 15th July, 2011 (Annexure P/l) on the ground that the order was not. passed by a competent authority i.e. the Collector, in accordance with the policy decision dated 13m June, 201 1. It appears that the transfer order has been approved by the Collector, though the same has been passed by the Chief Medical & Health Omcer, Durg. The petitioner has chosen to approach this Court. alter more than two months, thus, the importance of questioning the transfer order does not survive, as it appears that the transfer has been challenged on account of the fact. that in some cases, the transfer issued by non-competent olflcer, has been cancelled. If the transfer order has been complied with, there is no question of reconsidering the validity ofthe same. However, if it is still not. complied with, the same shall not be given eiTect. to in respect of the petitioner, and a. nesh order may be passed. The transfer is an incidence of service and the petitioner, in all matters is not likely to suffer, if the petitioner has already accepted by joining the new place of posting. Thus, at this stage, it is not proper to examine the legality and validity ofthe impugned transfer order. As a result, if the petitioner has already not been relieved, the transfer order dated 15th July, 2011 (Armexure P-l) in respect of the petitioner, shall not be given effect to, until a nesh order is passed by the competent. authority in public interest and in administrative ex1geney. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition disposed of. No order asto costs. w w- Sd/— SATISH K. ANGNIHORI Judge m PETITIONER : Kheman Lal. VER Sl IS RESPONDENTS : State ofChhattisgarh & Others.