^ n'- '• li Vh^—^ gsysitso rA BEFORETHE HON'BLEHIGHCOURTOFeHNATFISGARH AT BlLAieUR fGHHATTISGARHl WRIT APPEAL NQ. ^ /2007 fW&IT PETITION N0.5§1/2007) APPELLANT APPELLANJ .^ ^ .,<'y. ^?'-" ^y ^"' p- ^ Gaytam Prasad Naik, son of Dibyanand Nayak, aged about 44 years, presently posted and woFking as Multi Purpose Worker (MPW) Section Madva, Community, Health Centre, Dabhra, Dist Janjgir-Champa (CG) VERSUS ^^>^f ^ ,.^'^^ w ^" RESPQNBENTS ^ 1. The State of Chahttisgarh, thrpugh - the Secretary, Deptt ^, ^ Health, D.K.S. Building, Mantralay^ Rajpur (C.G.) 2. Under Secretary, Deptt of .}^< ^ - _ - .: Mealf^h, D.K.S. Building, MgntFalay, Raipur (CG) 3. Chief Medjcat Qfficer, DistFict Janjgir-Champa (CG) 4. Block Medical Officer, Dabhra, Djstt. Janjgir-Champa (CG) ^)cf^C-^.^^Q^(^pp^f ^^i^^ ^e^c^) W2^,%f^ WRIT APPEAL UNDER RULE^157, SUB GLAUSE 10 OF THE ^^ MI@H COURT RULES 2005 ^ o Fs 4.: HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON*BLESHRI H.L DATTU, CJ. HON'BLESHRI V.K. SHRIVASTAVA, J. APPELLANT WRIT APPEAL N0.16 OF 2007 Gautam Prasad Nalk Vereus RESPONDENTS The State of Chhattisgarh and Others. Present: Shri H.S. Patel, counsel for the appellant. Shri N.K. Agrawal, Dy. A.G. for the respondents/State. ORDER (Passed on 13m February, 2007) The following oral order of the Court was passftd by H.LDattu,CJ. The matter is posted for admission. By consent of both the teamed counsel, the matter is taken up for final hearing since the issue involvect in this writ appeal lies in a narrow compass. (2) A simple order of transfer from one district to anottier district was called in question by the petitioner before this Court in W.P.(S.). No.S91 of 2007. The learned Single Judge in a well considered order has rejected the writ pedtion. In that he has stated: "6. Further, it is well setHed principte of law that transfer is an incidence of service and jt is for the employer to decide as to where a particuEar officer/employee be posted keeping in view public interest as w©l! as administrative exigency. Thls Court has limited jurisdiction to interfere in the transfer matter and this Court can interfere only in the cases of the proved mala fide. non-competence of authority ZL-- passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the rules and regulation. None of the above grounds are available to the petitioner." ^s (3) In our view, what has been stated by the leamed Singte Judge is in accordance with law and in accordance with wetl settled tegal principles. Therefore, our interference with the said order is not called for. However, we reserve liberiy to the appellant to make one more representation before the appropriate authorities for his re-transfer from the place of transfer to his original place. If on such a representation Is made, the authorities are requested to consider the same. in accordance with law. (4) Ordered accordingly. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge subbu