^SSWt .!:' I 1 HIOH CQOR.T OI* ©HHATTISGARH:BIJASPUR W.P^(Sl_NQ.14§S7Qf2QQ8 SUri Narayaa Naredia 'Versus.1 ;,: ' • v. • StatebfCid.ail.d^otIiers , gQ^]E©iWR©ft%WBSfil^CT'@BER,,2QQ8; •?sl:a»'»r.* Sd/- Dhu'endra Misbt'a Judge :.-;'^ \m- ^ jll3 :!'Iil :il;r $aw Wffii\ li HIGH CCWRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P, (S) No.4587 of 2008 PETITIONER: Shri Narayan Naredia, S/o Oiikar Naredia, aged about 52 years, presenfly working as Dy. Direcfor/Secretaiy Selection. Grade) Krishi Upaj , Mandi, Bha^para, Distt. Raipur (CG) Versus RESPONDENTS: .State of C.G. TIiroiigh tihe Secretaiy, Agriculture Department, DKS BIuawan, Raipur (CC§ The Maaaging Director, Chllattisgarh ^Agricidture,: Marketing Board, RaipTir(CG) J' Siyaram Netam, aged about 53 years, ;preseut^ workuig as Dy. Director/Secretaiy ISelection Grade) Knshi Upaj Maudi, Kurud, Dtstt, Dtiamtari (CG) ' (Wiit Pet^cia ^mider Arfi!ate®2&jof;tlie eQnstitytiQn:,!of India) 1. 2. 3, Present: Shri P. DiwakaF, Sr. Advoeiate wifh. ShriA. Suraiia,^AdvbeSte for ttic petitioner. Shn Yasliwaat Siiigh Tllalsur, Deputy Advocate Geaeral fcr fhe 'Stafe/iesipoadeatlNo.l., Y, • ^; ; ,; ^ Shri Prateelc Shanha, CQUiisellbr respondenf No.3. ORDBR fPassed on: IJI October. 2008) Dhirendra MislM'a, J. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, KilruB, Distnet Dhamtari, sround. • • - 1 : l:;i •":.•. '; "• . By fhis petition yaderArficIe 226^o£fheConstitution of India,tl:te{i pstitioxier has iinpugned tUe oiderdatBd 14-8-2008 passed by iespc>n|leait No<2 li!:; whereby the petitioner, who is'wprkiag as Seoretary SeleGfiriaa Deputy Director, ^ Krishi Upaj | Mandi, Bhatapara,; has beeai traBj^feirett to Hl .tive ""is. ^^w.-y's^, *,.. J!';:'i . 'ilBBSrf^p Si!»S.^SS^'' 2, :4. .1 Ul The grievance of fhe petitkuier is that he was tiansferred by respondeiit Noi:2 vMe order dated 7-3-2008 ofAtuiexure-P/l from Akaitaia fdJatygu-- Champa, thereafter the petitioner was proinoted to his present post aad posted at Bhataparei^ vide Annexure-P/2 d^ted 24-7-2008. By ffae same ^- . ' . '; . ^ : • •• oraer respondent No.3 Siyarain Netam, who was working as SecrGtanr,. ^ •'.. '• •.''.':•'. "• ' , ^rtehi Upq Maiidi ]Samiti,!.Bhatapara, was also promoted as Deputy Directpr/Secretaiy Setection Grade aad posted at Krisbi Upaj Mandi, Kurud, District Dhatatari. Respondeiat No.^3 was relieved on 2-8-2008 vide Annexure-P/3 wliereas, fhe petitioner had alreadyjoined and taken oyer; Kis charge at Bhatapara on 28-7-2008. However, iu tessfbaiilydays.by^ fhe unpugned order of AiLU&xure-P/4 dated 14-&-2Q08 fhe petitloner was transferred to DIiajntan. Learaed counsel{for,i tihe getitioner^subiaitteli^ tBaf fBie saiid 1raasffir;| oider faas toeea passed oidy •to iaccoiiuiuxlate resppndeilf!No;3 Siyaraia N|etain,i who was brougbt baek tQ Bhatapara;fby the; samjeioa''der. Tl'ie'afatesaidl ; traasfer, order^lias la^u passed dtirmgitoaii^jperiM 1st Uuiy, pQOS;: withput'?thei»al3eiItgwan}r;;;:adiBiMstip:ti^^!^ ofl ^: :•'• '1: :;:'^1:;.;'.:';: Sl.''^ !: : - rl- :';':i;l conceraiag auiuster.'i (TUe petitioneBJaas trausfer wiftiia a periodoftessfhaxi 6monfhLS. • ' ; , H On ft)fi Qther hand, SIiri Yashwaat Siagh Tfaakui', leamed Depuify Advocate ,g|J/:^ ;• '.L Genfiral;for the State aad Sfari^I:>TatGekvSfiarma,]eaTaed'e6uase3f,|fbr: respoadent No.3 confended fbat fhe !:traasfer' order tias been pass^l i0a ; administeative exigeiicy by the Chhattisgarhj State iAgriculfura!) MaEfc^tiiag | !n(t ffien: iltSti !Q Board, wtiicli is an autonomous bQdyai^,l ttorefcre; trausier p^ State Governnientis nat,apT)HcabK|ui^ffi^!pr^eQt ca^.;^T!bfi,t^ ti only in<adencelof,service^butalsocoM^t!iaailioEseiVM^..^^% cannotordiaariSybeMteiferGdiuilgss^it^is'shywaiftiatatilias IWtv iiroi t&S 'feSRf-'' "'^:BS|; ^ 'iis:.a/'., %-£"^ IH 1 1 ^\\" \- inalafide exercise of power or in violation ofaay statutoiy provisiQn and the saine has been passed by aa aufhority not conipetent to pass such order. - 5. Reliance is placed in the matter of Mohd. Masood Ahinad V. State ofU.P. and others reported in (2007) 8 Supreme Cburt Cases 150. ^f . .': . . . ' 6. I liaveheardleaniedcounselfortheparties. 7. It is setfled law that the traasfer is not only iacidence of service but also condition of service. No.Govenuneiit seryaat or einployee ofa Piiblic Undertakiag has aay legal right to be posted at auy particular place or place ofhis choice. Tlie Court should-ordaiarily not itaterfere in exercise 6f discretionary jurisdrction of the State ia fhe inatters of transfer iuuder Article 226 offhe Con.stitution of India unless the Court finds tMatieither the orderis nialafide br tfaat the servieeniles prohihit sucli traasfer, or thaf the authorities who issued fhe orders, were notcorapetent authorift' to pass such orders. The Courts shouM ordmariJy nQtuifeifere witfaifhe fra.nsfer order untess (the traaisfer order is issued^ ^rbiteariUy or laalafidetyi ^ or in violatioa of any opei^tive ^gyidelineS or thesT^ the.trarisfer, as has beeii held by fhe Hon'ble Apex Cpiirt in the case of Mohd. Masood Aliinad.(Supra). - ! ' , . . : ::; iu t}ie iastant case,the petitionerhas siiffered tlurd traasfer by way of icapugned order withia a period pf 5 moaths. Tbe impugrted oider has beenpassed on 14-8-2008 i.e. uilessthana nioiifh from theorderijdated 24-7-2G08, Anaextire-P/2, whereby tlie petitioner and fespondent No.3 were proiuoted and posted at Bhatapaia aiidiKurud respectiyely. ^iBttfhof theni had already coinpljed with the oniersiand;tliey faadiJGined a|t^t!t|iej respectiye places. Respoadent No;3 lias been'brought back to IiisjgFeyi|ous| ice of postmg i.e. Bihatepara wifhin less tlian 12 days ironi tlie gt^teiJQni '*• .' : ' " '• . •: •f/^''".:.- •'••'•'•\''-': \ •" ' :'!' '•"..:;^ : '':^ . ;'- ..:: -^i-—'i^'iiLLii:';l:i:? ^ )-;: i iSl 1 Sf '/ni 9. 10. 6^ wttich he was relieved aud, therefore, iu fhe considered opinion of ttiis Court, the oi-derui question bas been passed to accomiaodate respondent No.3. The petitioner has been traasferred fhrice within a periQd of less fhaa 6 uionfhs. There is no apparent reason for relieviug/poStuig oid.er of the petitioner and respondent No.3 wifhiii a period ofone nionth since fh.ey ^ ' . ': . . . •- were posted after proniotion vi.de order dated 24-7-2008 and this leads to irresistible conclysion fhaf fhe sacue was actuated with aialafide, just tp accoiiunodate respondeitt No.3 to fhe.saine place fi-oliK wllere be was proiaoted aad pdsted at Kurud vide order dated 24-7-2008 andwas i-elieved in coiapUstuce oftlie above order bn 2-8-20p8. f .' In view of the foregoing analysis, I am of fhe coEsaldeied opinionlfhat fhe inipugncd order of transfer of the petitioner fixiin Rnshi Upaj Maudi Samiti, Bhatapara,; Bistriiof.iRaipur toj ISEisIii itlgaj ?KIa:adi: Samiti, iKurud, Distcfct ,BIiaBa;tari!,!'MeserK^'SK>1;)e.quasIied.;'':'; ^^' ':;:! . :1:'! • ';' '' 1 IIL fhe result, tb'eiwrit petition is aUowed and fhe inipugtied orfljer dated 14-8-20Q8 is quashed. Sd/- Dhirendra MNu-aJ I Judge^ :\ ^ ^ i:!":l;-': Wf! ,.iiT iii 't. la