Fa @2 ,® : any» nraa°ru usugas-r mm wrmfw 3rfer$wr §a,trugr. x5: /‘/‘/ LU K x732: CD —-—_—-——.-—-”- 3m E. éar /2oot airE'aWrr:—gng f‘amerrz‘wara arena nTnaWgara fa’EaDr, airg am’m 56 asf,%!&rmra,mraa aaiiga, mafatir‘afaar—mafaar‘aQWmg g2g 6%.$. aim? ail—ma: a% Navaaerrisirg 6mm 52 asf, %I&rrn*ra, wraa mm, waar‘anr‘a faar—rraafanfagmmg 33g vimgmrrga aims: fr $.3irr.tr§a,3irg WWII u5 asta‘érrcrrmmraa mxraafam'a Eva-aarfa ail-ma 3r§§a m‘Ta are—1,3111 awrrn seas? m§vl°r FWW, mma aaliaa, rrmqr‘anfa 358 imary mam a‘? mréaargmairg aura 55 a‘sf, FO ..' gisilar, WI?WW,Wraa amigaxramr‘anfa M, {slate- ,mbunal, HM UR. air-m? $rT¥raf féma gafr a? Efrarz‘r,3ir§ am‘m Ln asffavaWfr Wcrm,mma amigaxrmfanfa 373 awfr'aE? m—rnat a? mrrxsmaatsirg Win-n as am”; fv-TQW‘T fafw,3‘a:raa mm, rraar‘anfa gag mmfaara‘? arena a? Eraqmf‘aarfmirg WWW 32 asffqtawr‘r fafcras,3‘arraa amigaxmafanfa 393 3mm fum airma a? {mailg‘r fam,3{rg mm} no asffatwWafw, mma amiga, Imamfa g‘og mEga mt? thrfaar aim-1m 9ft Era? rsga Hart mg mr‘m 1.3‘ axffqtaavwrraxmra’a am, rrmafhvifafaar-Uaafawfa gt tg gmn‘r gmar 3mm aman‘ fr awtm 3Iarn,3{r§ WWW: 28 aSf,fata%wl°{fafcr$,mraa amiga, o . . . . D. ... riled IodayJ" ‘J‘ 29% by 5m; \3 wnz tr? M N V @@ ~3mwmim.?m?~3mmmaq.mmmmm4gw mEwiaQE «HwyEdna. g4mHm mEEQ wag 5 maWHHQQQRm miwm.~a§w§wm mg n33?3&3 umaqa waqnéam 34.3,: E mar ammHwERm mmmwwkgmwmaqdmagw mi Eqwmqm awm “Edam $4«#33 qmmhqm gang :o mahamxvqhmqqmm mimg. aamawmim fww§$ wEmHaw wmumqSun. «aim £4w4.w4. Eumaka’maug 3 mmrnqmahmnau muswm «Emmmim.w§?qqgmwmimwm§4§wm 2% “3.342% gig. £4ma313.u:m§ng um mm? 9.4aagahdqam m£w§3mmwmim§m§g m Egaugimagmaqmaw” .¢.‘u axqmmaaancma 3%.“ an iamm Eng. 33m maomHaE. mmQnraammq wwm mm mamqa.m¢_ mmm.m$.wmmqu muwmmt:mo marmw “3m”.am «ii. S mijqwna “$2342,”soSAuEg$3 a mama m HISH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP. (S) No. 3500 of 2005 Petitianers Tnakdhari Prasad & others Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & another SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri, J Shri Vikash 5hukla, Advocate for the petitioner. V. V. S. Marthy, Deputy Advocate Genera! with Smt. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the reepondentsISmte. ORDER (Passed on this 9‘" day of March, 200?) The following order of the Court is passed by Satish K. Agnihotri. J. 1. The peiitioners while working in Production Forest Division. Rainandgaon were transferred to Khairagarh Forest Division, on the same terms and conditionsvide order dated 2.1 .2001 (Annexure N1). . The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Raipur vide interim order dated 29.1 .2001 directed to maintain status duo in regard to the position of the petitioners and further they should be not relieved tiii the next date. By virtue of the interim erde: the petitioners are continuing at the 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 the validity of the transfer order. However. the respondents are at liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view the public interest and administrative exigency. without insisting on compliance of the impugned transfer order. 4. it is welt settled principie of law that transfer is an incident of service and it is for the empioyer to decide as to where a particular officer/employee be posted. keeping in view public interest as well as administrative exigency. This Court has limited iurisdiction to interfere in the transfer matter and this Court can interfere only in the case of proved malaflde. non-competence of ‘ authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being in conformity with the ruies and regulations. 5. ln View of the above. this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. f~~‘ sd/_ '5‘ Satish K. Agnihdtri .l Judge Thakur