55 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (s) No. 3808 of 2005 Petitioner Versus Respondsnts :1. 2. 3. Smt. Veena Tiwari W/o Shri H.P. Tiwari Asstt. Teacher, Purva Madhyamik Kanya Shala Janjgir State of Chhattssgarh. Through the Secretary Department of School Education D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) District Education Officer, Janjgir-Champa Principal, Purva Madhyamik Kanya Shala Janjgir SB Hon'bte Shri Satish K. Aanihotri. J. Present: Mr. Manish Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel lawyer for the respondents/State. ORDER (Passed on this 14th day of March,2007) 1. The petitioner, whiie working as Assistant Teacher at Middle School, Janjgir, was transferred to Primary School, Kani-Jobi, on the same terms and conditions vide impugned transfer order dated 10.9.2001 (P/1). 2. The Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Bench at Raipur, vide interim order dated 22.9.2001, directed to maintain status quo in regard to the position of the petitioner as was prevailing on 18.9.2001. By virtue of the interim order, the petjtioner is continuing atthe original place of posting. 3. Be that as it may, with the passage of time this petition has become infructuous, as period of transfer is not applicable forever. At this point of time there is no question to examine tiie validity of the transfer order. However, the respondents are at liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view the public interest and IL iiiil]iililiNilir<r' Thakur administrative exigency, w'rthout insisting on compliance of the impugned transfer order. 4. It is well settled principl®of law that transfer is an incidence of service and it is for the employer to decide as to where a particular ofRcer/employee be posted keeping in view public interest as well as administrative exigency. This Court has limited jurisdiction to interfere with the transfer matter and this Court can entertain judicial review only in the case of proved malafide, non- competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the rules and regulations. 5. In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge