IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.Not^^-3/2005 ^ Petitioner ^•".•.-^:^ ..^s\ps.^ ^-"'^^x' yf' ^ ^ Chhanulal Sharma, S/o Late Shri Mannulal / Xa^* ..^ Sharma, Aged about 45 years, Present sf^' ..' working at Basic Middle School, Bemetara, Education District Bemetara, R/o Shitla Mandir Road, Bemetara, District - Bemetara (CG) ,^s^f "/••••' <^> ^t/'^ty ^ .^ ^::^\ \.^ 0<'..-'^-^(^-'" '< .i~'.^^^ <^y ^'' ^ Versus ^1) .-<i' <•*• ^' State of Chhattisgarh - Through the Secretary, School Education Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ,,.-vl :''^'fi ^l^ <^^J" ^2) The District Education Officer, Bemetara (CG) :.>"' c;^ • WRJT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA iTFR^T^m^ ^•w|'-^l4lri'y,u>'^1<l<tto,Rlcl)ltiyx .^.:L^.O.:..^.^.5.. ^F^20p^ 3n^^TTORrti^ ?mraii^?T^wi? ^. L sntsTq^F (<yitgq<s) ?T?ITS1Rti(5a 3TT^9T 07.10.2005 Shri P. Diwakar, petitioner* ' Shri Arun Sao, Dy.] advance copy. J.A.NQ.8S22/2005 This is an applicatic^ Board. Thls interim applical W.P.No.3917/2005 The petitioner, who| Basic Middle School, Bem| 31.8.2005 (Annexure P-1-) to Prirnary School, Kapama] The submission of been transferred/relieved u| place of the petitioner. H^ Institution whereas there ar| transferred, the number ofl m<rfp<(1|»1?1j*1CTl'^f(^'<9 X&I^IT ' ^ari^Tan^ n" r. Advocate with Shri P.R. Patankar, for the 3.A,for the State/ respondents No.1 and 2 on h for urgent hearing. The rnatter is taken up on lion stands disposed of. is presentiy working as an Assistant Teacher at Btara has chalienged his order of transfer dated 3y which he has been tralnsferred from Bemetara ri, Block Nawagarh. ^arned counset for the petitioner is that according to the Po!icy dated 18.8.20p5 (Annexure P-B2) the petitioner should not have [iless some reiiever or a new person is posted in also submits that there^are 210 students in the ^ only six teachers. Therefore, if the petitioner is teachers wouid be reduced to 5 and the same wouid be iesser than th^ required number of teachers to be provided according to the basic struc|ure ofthe education pQlioy ofthe Government. At last, tearned cou?) the president of Bemeta Ipnit of Chhattisgarh Shikshak Sangh which is a recognized union, therefor^ mid-session transfer and studies in 12th and 11th i sel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is , the petitioner being the;office bearer shouid not have been transferred. L^arned counsel also submits that the transfer is a two sons of the petitioner are prosecuting their in| the schoois of Be.metara and sn the new place where he has been transfer|"ed, there is no schooi imparting higher education. SP/FS/2005-20,000 Xt-HC-78 ^T-TI <-qiqirtq, yTYtWci, R^l'l-l^ <TPI^T ^mm 3n^5T q^q? (t^|i«j|6|<^) W^ 200 3II^CT9H'Rr<i<fr ?WT31T^tT^Hifl» ^ ^RTTW ^iRa 3TT^^T -^- i have heard learned counsi in the opmion of this Court in an order of transfer by a Cous Court that the person working retaining him at a particular The Apex Court white deaii -V- these are not the grounds for interference of !aw. It has settled by the Apex ^n a transferabte post cannot c!aim for |)f posting for ever. ijig with the matter of Kendi'iva Vidvslsva DamocfarPrasay Pandey. 2004 AfR SCW55G3 referring to the various decisions has obs^ "Transfer which is an in<^ with by the Courts unless it by maiafide or infraction governir§g the transfer Ornssa)- Unless the ordeil made In vioiation of operal v/ith it. (See ifnlon of M (^ee transferred and posted authority to decide, Unles^ fide or Is made in vioiatiorl Courts shouid not ordinar3 others Vs. Jansrdan foilows; "No Goverrfnent undertaking has any particular p!ace or particular empioyee transferable posts fr^ Incident, but a cond|tion interest and efficiendy order of transfer is exercise or stated t< prohibiting any suc?ti normally cannot int^rfere routine, as though) substituting their empioyee/managem^nt, <PI<|[c?<n<1 <11*IO>V^rfo^3 xRlX^IX ^ail^ran^^i il for the petitioner at length. rved vide 4 as foilows: idence of service is not to be interfered is shown to be ciearly arbitrary or vitiated of any prescribed norms of principles Amban! Kanta Ray Vs. State of of transfer is vitiated by mala fide or is ive guidelines, the Coyrt cannot interfere ^dia Vs. S.L Abbasj. Who shouid be where js a matter for the admlnistrattve the order of transfer is vitiated by mala of operative any guidelines or ruies tlie |y interfere with it. in Union of inida & & anothe!-. it was obsen/ed as De^anath servant or employee of a public egal rsght to be posted forever at any one of his choice since transfer of a lappointed to the ciass or category of >m one piace to another is not only an of service, necessary too in pubis'c in the pubiic administration. Unless an shown to be an outcome of mala-flde be in violation of statutory provislons transfer, the Courts or the Tribunals with such orders as a matter of they were the appellate authoritles own decision for that of the E:, as againstsuch orders passed in the ^3ii:^..^^— ® vjtw| r^wIC9<1, ^•^ltl'll<S, ROI<<I^ <1f*tCTlw^i^ STT^^TW^IW ?CTgn^?TaRN! w £* {Zo^ 3n^9T^P(4<if^61<6{) wissoo ?^TW?rf^T3T^?T .-3>-' interest of admini This position w Hydroelectnc Pov ^trative exigencies of the service concerned. ^s highlighted by this Cousl in Nationa! ^erCorpn. Ltd. Vs. Shri Bhagwan." So far as the point rs difficulties are concerned, in tt look into the personal difficult obiiged to iook into the perso| him/her in such a conditi^n to the empioyer and in the pr^ not inclined to intBrfere in the However, looking to tl granted to hlm fo file a detaile|j and if such representation i^ alongwith a copy of this orde|- same within a period of 4 representation and the resul petitioner. This petitjon stands finl Consequently, M.W.P.I ,<Piq[<?>4l<1 ^M^T^'f^lt ^Rrt^SIX ^srf^Nsn^ h |ised by the petitioner regarding his personai |e opinion of this Court, it is for the employer to |es of the employee. The Qjnployer is aiways |ia! grievances of his employee with a view to that he/she may render an excelient service Isent facts and circumstances of the case, i am ransfer order of the petitioner. se grotinds raised by the petitioner, a liberty is representation before the concerned authority fi!ed within a period of 3 weeks from today ', the competent authority shal! dispose of the from the date of receipt/production of o? the same shall be communicated to the illydisposed of. slo3917/2005 alsqstat|idsdjsposed ot Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge SP//FS/2005-20,000 ^. ^ .A<" ^ ^