HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR WntApBeaUto.251 oflOlQ APPELLANT: Petitioner Shahnawaz Khan, aged about 51 year, S/o late Shri A.G. Khan, R/o Babji Park, Ring Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG), presently posted as Food Inspector, Bilaspur (CG) Versus RESPONDENTS: 1. 2. 3. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: the Secretary, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Commissioner, Food, Civil Supplies and ConsuD'ier Protection, Directorate, Raipur (CG) The Collector, Bilaspur (CG) Present: Shri R. Pradhan, counsel for the appellant. Shri G.D. Waswani, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents. Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar, JJ. JUDGMENT (6-8-2010) 1. The appeUant is a food inspector. He has been transferred from Bilaspur to Directorate, Raipur on the same post on adbiinistrative ground vide order dated 15th July, 2010. He challenged his transfer order by way of Writ Petition (S) No.3857 of 2010 on the grounds that he has suffered 7 transfers within a period of 4V2 years and he has been transferred within a period of 9 months from the date hejoined at Bilaspur which is in violation oftransfer policy of the State Government according to which ordinarily only °^<».a,« '<:>-1 "saa "g.^ JJ "®r--':/f ,A- those officers should be transferred who are posted at the place for more than 2Y2 years. However, writ petition has been dismissed by the impugned order. 2. Shri Raghvendra Pradhan, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant's writ petition has been dismissed without considerkig the argum.ents of the appellant in proper perspective that he has suffered frequent transfers within a short period of 4V2 years and he has been transferred from his present place of posting within a period of 9 rnonths in violation of clause- 9 of the transfer policy of the State Goveminent (Annexure-P/11). In the similar situation, in Writ Appeal No.113/2010 preferred by one Shri M.L. Agrawal, the High Court issued the notices and stayed the transfer order. Relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Bir Bajrang Kuinar Vs. State of Bihar and others {AIR 1987 SC 1345}, it was argued that where two petitions involving identical point are filed in the High Court, such petitions should be heard analogously to avoid any anomalous situatioh. 3. It is settled law that scope of judicial review of transfer under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is very limited. The principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in catena of decisions is that an order pf transfer is part of service eondition of qp. employee whieh should not be interfefed with ordinarUy by a Court Qf law in exercise of its digcretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 unless the Court finds that either the order is malafide or that service rules prohibit such transfers, or that the I',:.^M .-(l".-'lh. ~~^. .if"" "'^ ^" ": .JJ ., '^ •<./? authorities which issued orders were not competent to pass orders. {Rajendra Roy Vs. Union of India, (1993) 1 SCC 148; Hydroelectric Power Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Shri Bhagwan, (2001) 8 SCC 574; State Bank ofIndiaVs. Anjan Sanyal, (2001) 5 SCC 508}. 1 4. It is also settled law that transfer policy of the Government does not confer any right upon its employees and it is simply a guideline to the authorities concerned. 5. As far as the contention of the appellant that in M.L. Agrawal s case, this Court has entertained writ appeal and issued notice to the respondents and stayed transfer order is concerned, the appeUant has placed photocopy ofthe interim. order passed by this Court and from perusal thereof, we find that the appellant in that case was retiring in IVa years. 6. In the circuinstances, we are of the opinion that the impugned order is based on settled pruiciples of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the ruatter of transfer. 7. In the result, we do not find any illegality or iniirmity in the inipugned order warranting interference. The writ appeal is, therefore, liable to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. Barve Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge '\ ' —