S b S ingle Bgnch t Hon'le rifrfifion (5) No. 671 S n WPé 912007 hiv Shakar- Sih Sarup Sinh ged, abou'i' ears ssiéhnf 0 Conservation Officer, Rio ang agari Secfr Mangia B§Fasptsr= CG () \ Pr etifione 9h, S/ol Lat g, a 44 y: A 5H Ga N o 2 ‘l'afe 6f Chha‘l'fisgr he Secre‘l'ary, Agricuure eparfmenf, DKS Bhwan, :Raiur (C5 Th d e ( 3 ‘ KS B pUr h P Singh, Assismnf S oservcd'ion Officer, Ambikuu’ isMcf - Scrguja (CE D n p" ) e Uner 5e¢refary, Agri‘cul‘ruf CG) €§dr1mént 'D hawén, Rai Sri R oil, Cn pr, D ) P : resem Shri PRr?q+ahkar, ‘c Ms Suni‘faJain, P dvance copy. nséi or- fhe pé’rioher. i iawyer for The STa‘fe o oRAL R ORDE (assed on 17*“ November, 200 Hear-d o admisson ficer‘ a1” Bilaspur has be Bilaspur- To Ambikap’ur 9n adminisfmfive grou en ‘rmnsfer-red fr m m: Kmar sinh. J. su u é e Versus S ah' ' Th rough f u o’ ane a u f ri‘ n P 7) h i. f om in School and one in Coliege): fhefeforeWif fhe pe‘ri'rioner' is sen fi'om Bilaspur 1'0 Ambikdpur, if may adverseiy affect- fheir smaies. Learhe‘d co’unsei \for the pe'ri'rioner reiies upon fhe decisio ducafi Te matter of Direci'or of Schoo h , here 1'he 'rmnsf waseffecfed during mid o Apex \Cour‘r rendered in Madras and Ofhers Vs QKhr-u a \Theven and anoter repqrfed in 1994 sugg (2! $CC.666. In fhe s'qid ma’r'rer -seon, Te Suprem Courf said fha‘r, aH'hough There is no_ such rule, bu'f in effecting Transfer, The fdc‘i' 'rha'r fhe vchiidren of an'empioyee are sfudying should be given due weigh f Te exigencieseof The service are no‘ The Supreme Cpur‘r obseri/ed 'fha‘l' learned counsei f o p e e e f The curre academic year. If is in these fac‘rs and circumsianceé ”o Tha‘i particular cas‘e: while se'r'ring aside fhe order of Tribunal, fhe S d f he ransfer fiii The end of current academic year In The opinion of This Court The aforesaid judgemen‘i’ is no’ heipfui 1'0 The peTiTioner, because iT is disTingUishable on facTs f s f l ad he Oc'Toer, 2007 and also Tha The orer has been ‘passed showing adminisTraTive exigencies. T e s f T p gnt ure appearing or The appei_ian+;(empioyer “in The? case) was unqbie 'r oin‘r ouf 'rha'i' fhere was such urgency: in That case fha‘r 1'h' mployee could'no'l' have been accommodai'ed fill fhe nd o m f ‘ upreme Cour‘r directed Thai fine appeilanf shoul no‘r efecf T T . irsTiy, on The ground Tha‘T in This STaTe; academic session begin rom July/August and ends in ThemonTh of March/Apri: n T rder of Transfer is passe on 2 here is noThing on record To show ThaT The exigencies of Th ervices are'noT urgenT a'nd’on ThaTground, eiTher’ The Transfer o he peTiTionercould be seT aside onk’epT in abeyance To comleTe The academic-session. he Transfer isan‘ incidence of service. Nobody working o‘J’ z ranferable posT can ciairn for his po’s‘Tihg aT a a Ts ? n f Een h l w er ssi h e t i h r f : :b T d o d 7” T on . depends upon Th2, adminisfmfive'exigency aé alsq pubiic inferesf. lafides, exfmneous consld sfaTufor'y rule or fhe Ac? 'Hne same cannoT be m'terfered wwh by a CourT of law, is The settled View of ‘fhe‘Apex Cour-f. Learned counsel for The pefi‘rioneh could no‘l‘ point oul'ony at ”the V Uniess ‘l'hé order of-Tmnsfer ’is shown To be vi‘rio‘l'ed by'ma era''l'ioiis or is 'sho‘Wn ‘1'0 be passed againsfcmy such ground of malaflde or of ex‘l'mneous conSIderuhon or Th .order has been passed agams? anv s‘ra‘rufory rule or The Ac1' i/do nof find any reason ‘ro infer-fare w rlh The order of fransfer of ‘l'he pe‘h‘honer on This ground The pe‘h'l'lon has no merrr and fhe same Is dlsrmssed a'l‘ The mo‘hon stage ITself l Consequently I A Nos 1& 2 also s'rand disposed of Sd/— ' Sum] Kumar Smha ‘ Judge