IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14773 of 2009 1. SURITH GAHLOT S/O LATE KARDHANI GAHLOT R/O VILL.- NEHUTA, P.S. AURANGABAD, DISTT.- AURANGABAD Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ] DEPARTMENT NEW SECRETARIATE, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. SRI NARENDRA KUMAR SINGH, HEAD MASTER SHAHEED HIGH SCHOOL, GAYA ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Sucheta Yadav, Adv For the State:- Maruth Nath Roy A.C. to S.C. 11 For the Respondent No. 3. :- Mr. Dinu Kumar, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv --------------------- 2. 20.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State as also for the private respondent no. 3. The controversy relates to the posting of Headmaster in the Mahabir Inter College, Gaya. Earlier the petitioner was posted as such on 5.6.2009 when on an appeal preferred by respondent no. 3 on the premise that he was senior, the Principal Secretary of the department has set aside the posting of the petitioner with directions for considering the case of respondent no. 3, in accordance with law. In accordance with Government policy providing for exercise of option for choice posting both the petitioner and respondent no. 3 gave their choice for the same institution. This Court does not consider it necessary at this stage to interfere with the impugned order in view of the fact that no positive direction for posting of respondent no. 3 has been 2 given but his case has been directed to be considered. Needless to state that the case of the respondent no. 3 shall have to be considered in light of the seniority between the parties, and the rules regulating choice postings. Issues of transfer and posting are for the authorities to decide and the Courts may interfere only if there has been a violation of a statutory provision/statutory rules or the transfer is mala fide etc. This Court is not persuaded to accept the submission on behalf of the petitioner to permit him to continue to work as the Principal of the institution till such time that a fresh decision is not taken with regard to the respondent no. 3. However, since the presence of a Principal in the institution is essential, the Court leaves it to the authorities to decide the interim arrangement pending a final decision when the petitioner shall not be prejudiced in consideration for such temporary arrangement only for the reason of the present order. This Court expects that the authorities shall not unnecessary complicate matters by avoidable delay and shall take an appropriate final decision within a maximum period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed off. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)