HK5H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S) No.3896of2005 Petifioner Versus Respondents 1. Gokul Das Sahu, S/o Shri Naval Sahu, Asstetant Teacher, Pnmsry Giris School. Kosmarra. Distrirt - Dhamtari (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, School Educatlon Department. l^antralaya. D.K.S. Bhawan,, Raipur (C.G.) 2. 3. Collector. District-Dhanrtari, C.G. District Education Officer, District- Dhamtari (C.G. SB: Hon'bte Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri, J Shfi V. K. Sahu, Advocate for the p^tioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State. ORDER (Passed on this 14th day of March, 2007) The foUowing orcter of the Court is passed by Satish K. Agnihotri, J. 1. The petitioner while working as Assistant Teacher at Primary Girls School. Kosmarra, District- Dhamtari was transferred to Mklcfle School, SilQhat, on the same terms and conditions, vide impugned order dated 22^.2001 (Annexure A/1). 2. The MacShya Pradesh Adminjstrative Tribunal at Raipur vkte interim order dated 6.10.2001 directed to maintain status quo in regard to the posttion of the petitionsr as was prevailing on 28.9.2001. By virtue of the interim order the petitioner is continuing at the originat place of posting. 3. Be that as it may, with the passage of tjme this petttion has become infructuous as period of transfer is not applteabte forever. Al this point of time there is no qu^tion to examine the validity of the transfer order. However, the respondents are at liberty to pass appropriate ^Ll Thakur orders keeping in view the pubjfc interest and administrative exigenGy. without insjsting on compliance of the impugned transfer order. 4. it is well settted principte of law that tran^er fe an incictent of service and it is for the employer to decicte as to where a partteular officer/empjoyee be posted, keeping in view pubJic interest as well as adminjstrative exigency. This Court has Umited jurisdfctjon to interfere with the transfer matter and this Court can entertain judiclal 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 peBtion stands disposed <rf. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge