/^ HIGH COURTOF JUDICATURB CHHATriSGARHsBILASPUR SingleBench: Hon'bleShrISatishK.Agaihotri,J. WRITPBTITXON NQ. 15 OF 2003- Petitioner : Sint. Sarla Kannahe, aged about 46 years, wife of Shri Gyaaesh Kuniar, Karmalie, U.D.C. Grade II, Goveriunent Science CoUege, Rajnandgaon, CUiattisgarh. Versus Respondents :1. Stateof Chhatdsgarh, through:the Secretaiy, Departiaentof Higher Education Mantralay, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur-(C.G.). 2. Pruicipal, Govenunent Science CoUege, Rajnafadgaon, Chhattisgarh. Present: Smt. Renu Kochar, counsel for the petitioner. Sbri Paukaj Slirivastava, Panel lawyer for the respondents/ State. ORAL ORDER (3rd February, 2006) 1. Leamed counsel for the petitidner subinits that the petitioner, who was workingas U.D.T. Grade II in fhe Govemiaent Science College, Rajnandgaon, was transferred to the Goverument CoUege, Manpur, District Rajnaadgaon vide order dated 19.9.2002 2. The petitioner has challenged fhe vaUdily of ftie impugued order 'dated 19.9.2002 on ttie grouiid that the order was passed in inala&de exerciseofpower.The petitioner has ffled O.A. No. 2969/2002 before the Madhya Pradesh AdTniTiistiati.ve Tribunal, Jabalpur. Le'araed Adiaimstratiwe !'•..' .'.'"• Tnbunal dismissed her application on 1.10.20p2 wifhthe 1,5- >'..: 'fc~'~ direction tfaat the representation of the petitioner would be considered and decided wifhia one Dionfh froin fhe conmiuiiication offhe said order. 3. Accordiag to learaed counsel for the petitioner, the au^iorities did not coiisider her representation and as such the petitioner was constrained to ffle this petition, praying for same rclief, which she had sought in O.A. No. 2969/2002. This Court, vide Qrder dated 9.1.2004, stayed fhe impugned transfer order. Theimpugned traasfer dated 19.9.2002 could not be given effect fo by virtue offhe order dated 1.10.2002 passed, by the Madhya Pradesh Adiaitustrati.ve Tnbunal ui O.A. No. 2969/2002 aud order dated 9.1.2004 passed by this Court. 4. SiucetheiiapugD.edordercouldnotbe given effect to, itisnot necessary to go intp the validily of the said impugned order and fhe saM impugued ordercannotbe given effecttonow. It is further fiar the einployer^to post an elnployee at a particular place in public uiterest as weU as in adniuustrative exigency. However, in fhe facts of the case, where grievance of the petitioner is fhat slie has fhree daughters and she is sufferiiig fiTQin thyroid gaiter, which requires extensive laedical treatinent aad same is npt possible at any pfher place, the respondents are directed to consider her physical conditiort as well as other fanuly plDblelns, while passing atty order of traasfer fi-cna thff presenf place of posting |i.e. Govenimeat 1 ScienGe College, Rajliaudgaon. lii. tbe facts soiS. circuiiistances ^of fhe case, it is expected that fh|e!| > ¥ @%% s ^^^^^S^^B^^S^^^^ Bablu respondents/auttiorities wffl aot iasist upon, coinpliance of fhe earlier impugned transfer order. 5. The petition is accordiagly disposed of. No order as to costs. SA'. satishK-ASnih^i re :^sS-f!SIS9 "^^^^l^t^ ^^S1;^^l^:l[.ll WiSSS IWBISBI ..•.-iu;unB»s3gi;ii