^ ^ BEFORE THE M.P. STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BENCH RAIPUR O.A. N0. 72001 4^/^'y ^9:-w/^ APPLICANT i;<^ NQN-APPLICANT Smt. Sunita Jha Assistant Professor Deptt.ofEnglish Govt Girls College, Durg VERSUS 1. StateofC.G. through the Secretary Department of Higher Education Govt. ofChhattisgarh, D.KS.Bhavan, Raipur 2. Principal Govt. Girls College, Durg (C.G.) ORIGINALAPPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE M.P. STATE ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNALACT, 1985 &n HSGi-S COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH AT BILASPUR SiNGLE BENCH : HON'BLE iVSR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI. J. Petitioner Respondents WRIT PETJTiON (S.) N0.3899 OF 2095 Smt. Sunita Jha versus State of C.G. and another Petltioner Respondent CONTEMPT PETITSON N0.130 OF 200S SmtSunitaJha versys Y.S.Bele Present : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, counse! for the petitloner in both the petitions. IVIr. V.V.S.Moorthy, Deputy Advocate Generai with Mr. Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State in W.P.(S.)No.3899/2005. Mr. Pankaj Shrivasteva, counse! for the respondent in Contempt Pt.No.130/2006. QRDER (Passed on 12 of October, 2006) These are fc,vo petitions, i.e., Writ Petition (S.) No.3899 of 2005 and Contempt Petitlon No.130 of 2006. The contempt petition arises in the writ petition. Thus, ths writ petition and the contempt petition are being disposed of by this commonorder. ^> ^- 2. The onglnai application was filed before the Stats Administrative Tribunal, Bench at Ralpur. impugning the transfer order dated 24-9-2001 (Annexure A-1). whereby the petitioner, who was lworking on the post of Assistant Professor at Government Girls Colisge, Durg, was transferred to the Government Coiiege, Patan, Dlstrict Durg. 3. After admitting the petition on 6-10-2001, the Tribunai, by its order dated 12-10-2001, granted quo wlth regard to the of the petltioner as on 29-9-2001. Learned counsel for the petitloner submits that despite there being the said order of status quo, a transfer order dated 30-6-2006 (Annexure C-3 in Contempt Petition No.130 of 2008) was passed transfsrring the petitioner to Governmsnt Coiiege, Saja, District Durg. However, no effect to the said order dated 30-6-2005 was given. 4. As a matter of fact, the petitioner, by way of interim order dated 12-10-2001, remained posted on the same piace, i,e., Government Giris Coliege, Durg for about five years. The petitioner could not contjnue at one place forever. 5. it is weil settled principle of law that transfer Is an incident of service and it is for the empioyer to decide as to where a particuiar officer/employee be posted keeping in view public interest as weli as admjnistratlve exigency. This Court has iimlted jurisdiction tointerfere v-/ith the transfer matters and this Court can interfere only with the case of proved mala fide, non-competence of authority passing the transfer order and transfer order not being In conformlty with the ruies and regulatlons. None of the above grounds are avai!abie to the petitioner. in the facts and circumstances of the case, it Is not necessary to examine vaiidity of the transfer orders at this stage. However, the respondents - authorities are directed not to insist on compiiance of the transfer orders dated 24-9-2001 and 30-6-2006. ^ ^ 6. Accordingiy, the writ petition stands disposed of and the contempt petition is dlsmjssed. Notice to the respondent in the contempt petition is discharged. However, the respondents - authorities are at liberty to pass appropriate order for posting the petitioner in public interest and adminlstratlve exigency, in accordance with iaw. No order as to costs. 7. A copy of this order be placed on th©record of the contempt petition. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Gopal