NNNt HiQH COURT OF CHHATTSSOARH: BiLASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 3S37 of^OS Petitioner Smt. Nivedita Mukherjee, W/o. Shri Tapas Mukherjee, aged about 44 years, worKlng as an Assistant Professor at Government College, Gunderdehi, Distt. Durg (CG), R/o. 8/4 Radhika Nagar, Bhiial, Distriot Durg (C-G). Versvs Respondent State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Departmentof Higher Eduoatlon, D.KS, Bhav^n, Mantraiaya, Raipur (CG). (Writ Petitlon under Articie 226 of the Constitution of indla) SB: Hon'ble IVIr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Preseiifc Shri Ravendra Agra^val, ooL'nsel for the petitloner. Shrs Y.S. Thakur, Dy. Advocate Generai for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 8G1 day ofJuiy, 2008) The petitioner chailenges the vaiidity of the transfer order dated 30-6-2008 (Annexure P/1), whereby the petitioner working as an Assistant Professor (Sooioiogy) in Government Coiiege, Gunderdehi, has been transferred to Government Coifege, Anunda, District Durg, on admlnistrative ground. 2) Learned counsei appearing for tne petitioner submits that the transfer of the petitloner is bad on account of the fact that within two years, the petitioner has been transferred three times i.e., (i) on 18-9-2006 the petitioner was transferred from Bhilaj to Gandai, (il) on 6-7-2007 the petitioner was transfsrred from Gandai to Gunderdehi and (iii) on 30-6-2008 the petjttoner was transferred fromGunderdehi to Ariunda, The petitioner nas not impugned any transfer order eariler The petitloner is not questbning the vaiidity of the transfer order on any permisslble grounds i.e., maia fide, non- competence of the officer or contraventlon oft'ne statutory ruEes and regulations. 3) it is weiS settled principie of iaw that transfer is an incident of seivlce and it is for the empioyer to decide asto whether a partiouiar otfioer/empioyee be posted keeping In vlev^ pubiic interest as weli as administrative exigency. This Court has iirnited jurisdiction to interfere In the transfer matter and this Court can interfere oniy in the case of proved mala fide, non-competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being In conformity with the ruies and regulations. The raju ^ petitioner/empioyee cannot be permitted to remain at one piace, forever, by Court orders. 4) The petitioner has not made out any case for interference by this Court in the present transfer. 5) in view of the foregoing, this petitson is devolci of merit and deserves to be dismissed. Accordingiy, the petition isdismissed. g^ SatishK.Agnihotri Judge