1 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1243 of 2010 Smt.Chhaya Ramdas Wani. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1244 of 2010 Smt.Manisha Devram Sarkate. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1245 of 2010 Mr.Najir A.Gani Patel. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1246 of 2010 Mr.Bharat Babu Pawar. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents 2 AND WRIT PETITION NO.1247 of 2010 Smt.Mangala Motilal Dedwal ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1248 of 2010 Smt.Archana Arun Patil. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1249 of 2010 Mr.Sanjay Motigir Gosavi. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1250 of 2010 Mr.Banaji Sawaleram Darekar ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND 3 WRIT PETITION NO.1251 of 2010 Smt.Dipti Raghunath Kadam. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1252 of 2010 Smt.Surekha Prakash Bandasode. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1253 of 2010 Mr.Balu Damu Salve. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1254 of 2010 Smt.Bhavana Padmakar Patil. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents 4 AND WRIT PETITION NO.1255 of 2010 Smt.Sabiha Md.Ismail Ansari. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1256 of 2010 Smt.Smita Nilesh Dalvi. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1257 of 2010 Smt.Supriya Sunil Kasare. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1259 of 2010 Smt.Sharda Subhash Borse. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents 5 AND WRIT PETITION NO.1260 of 2010 Mr.Madhav Devidas Khandare. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1261 of 2010 Smt.Sushma Suresh Dahate ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1262 of 2010 Smt.Sanjana Sunil Chavan. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1263 of 2010 Mr.Satish Gorakhnath Bhosle. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents 6 AND WRIT PETITION NO.1264 of 2010 Smt.Rekha Prajakt Jangam. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1265 of 2010 Smt.Seema Milind Khaladkar. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1266 of 2010 Mr.Amol Madhukar Manjule. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1267 of 2010 Smt.Vandana Ramchandra Dhobale. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents 7 AND WRIT PETITION NO.1268 of 2010 Smt.Surekha Prakash Wadhavane. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1269 of 2010 Smt.Meena Sudhakar Patole. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1270 of 2010 Mr.Vilas Shankar Vaishnav. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1271 of 2010 Smt.Yasmin Mohammad Yusuf Momin ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents 8 AND WRIT PETITION NO.1272 of 2010 Smt.Dhanashri Sanjay Chavan. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1273 of 2010 Smt.Nishigandha Bharat Pawar. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1291 of 2010 Smt.Suvarna Arun Tendulkar ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1292 of 2010 Smt.Ashwini Devram Gavit. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents 9 AND WRIT PETITION NO.1299 of 2010 Smt.Latabai Banaji Darekar. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1302 of 2010 Smt.Sulakshna Satish Bhosale. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO.1312 of 2010 Mr.Suresh Bhika Pardeshi. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents --- Mr.V.N.Tayade, for Petitioners. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, AGP for Respondent no.1. Mr.C.S.Joshi, for Respondent nos. 2 to 5. --- 10 CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED: 17TH FEBRUARY,2010 P.C.: 1. By these petitions, the petitioners who are teachers working under Zilla Parishad, Thane, posted within the area of Panchayat Samiti, Bhiwandi, are challenging orders, passed by the Block Development officer, of transferring them from one place to the other. The area of a Panchayat Samiti normally does not exceeds 40 kilometers, therefore, it can be safely said that all the places of transfer are within the radius of 40 km. Admittedly, there are no statutory rules framed regulating the transfers. By Government Resolution dated 30.4.2008, guidelines have been issued regulating transfer of employees of the Zilla Parishad. In these petitions transfers are not challenged on the ground that they have been ordered malafidely by the competent authority. There are no allegations of malice made against the Authority. Nobody has been joined by 11 name as Respondent to the petition for making allegations of malice. The learned Counsel appearing for petitioners relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case B.Varadha Rao Vs. State of Karnataka & ors., AIR 1986 Supreme Court 1955 contending that the transfer orders are liable to be set aside. In our opinion, the observations of the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case B.Varadha Rao referred to above, do not support the contention of the petitioners. Perusal of that judgment shows that the Supreme Court has, in that judgment, relied on its own observations in the judgment in the case E.P.Royappa Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 1974 SC 555 . They read as under:- It is an accepted principle that in public service transfer is an incident of service. It is also an implied condition of service and appointing authority has a wide discretion in the matter. The Government is the best judge to decide how to distribute and utilise the services of its employees. However, this power must be exercised honestly, 12 bona fide and reasonably. It should be exercised in public interest. If the exercise of power is based on extraneous considerations or for achieving an alien purpose or an oblique motive it would amount to malafide and colourable exercise of power. Frequent transfers, without sufficient reasons to justify such transfers, cannot but be held as malafide. A transfer is malafide when it is made not for professed purpose, such as in normal course or in public or administrative interest or in the exigencies of service but for other purpose than is to accommodate another person for undisclosed reasons. It is the basic principle of rule of law and good administration, that even administrative actions should be just and fair. It is clear from the aforesaid observations of the Supreme Court that transfer is an incident of service and the authority has a wide discretion in the matter of ordering transfer. Therefore, unless there are malafide alleged and the case is made out that the Authority ordering transfer was actuated by 13 malice, in our opinion, the order of transfer cannot be interfered with. It cannot be forgotten that the places where the petitioners are transferred are within the radius not more than 40 kms, and considering the present means of communication available, there is hardly any possibility of displacement of any of the petitioner at a very distant place. In this view of the matter therefore, in our opinion, it will not be appropriate to interfere with the transfer orders in the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitions are, therefore, rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (A.R.JOSHI,J.)