(^) {y^ ^ ^'^ D.L. Divyakai;s/o Late Shri L.R. Divyakar, aged about 48 yeai-s Lecturer, GoveiTunent Boys Higlier Secondary' School, Jashpur Nagar, Distt. Jashpur (CG). 5. State of Clihattisgarli, fhrough tJie Secretary, Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe Weltare Department, Maatralaya, Raipur (C.G) The Coiniaissioaer, Tribal Wetfare Department, Raipur Tlie Principal, Govt. Boys Higher Secondary School, Jashpur, Distt. Jashpur (C.G). Assistant Coiainissioner, Tribal Welfare Departiaent, Jashpur (C.G). Shri B.K. Rajput, Assistaat Coiiimissiouer, Tribal Welfare Depai-taieat, Jashpur (C.G). SliriJ.K.Shastri, , counsel for fhe petitioner. Shii Ajay Dwivedi, P.L. appears for fhe for fhe State/ respondents on advance copy. ^J Heard ou adniissiou. The petitioner, wlio is workiag on the post of lectiirer ia Govt. Boys Higher Secoadanr School, Jaslipiir Nagar, Distt. Jashpur, has been transterred to Luiidi-a, Distt. Surguja by order dated 7.7.2007. Earlier, fhis order was challenged before this Court vide W.P.(S) No. 4431/2007 aad the said writ petition was witlidrawn on 02.8.2007 niakiiig stateiaeat fhat fhe petitioner wiU ffle a representation. befofe fbe concei-ned aufliority. Leamed counsel for the petitioaer subinits that fhereafter represeatation was tiied on 10.8.2007 but no decision has toeen taken on the said representation till date. ^ W.P.IS) No. 6844/2007 As far as fhe laerits of fbe case is coucenied, learued counsel tbr fhe petitioner argues fhat on account of aBegations of soiue uTegularities, two aniiual increm.ents wifli aon-cuiiiulative eSect were witblield by the concemed aiithority by order dated 11.5.2007 (Aanexure P-6) au.d thereafter fhe petitioner has been transferred, fherefore, fhe order is niala-fide. On being poiiltedly asked fi-om. leamed counsel for fhe petitioner that siuce when tlie petitioner is posted at Jashpur, he subinits fhat presenfly he is not ia a position to uiake stateinent ia fhis regard but fhe petitioner is posted there prior to 3 years. So far as fhe laerits of the case are concemed, fhese are not fhe grounds for iaterfei-iiig wifh the orcler of transfer of aii eiuployee who holds a transferable post. Traasfer is an iacidence of service. No persoa working on a ti-aiislerable post caa claiia to be posted at a particular place. it is for tlie eiaployer fo see that who should be posted where iu the iiiterest of better lunctioniag of fhe departnient as also ia fhe pubUc iaterest. It is tlie setfled view of fhe Apex Court that ualess fhe order of traiisfer is vitiated by inala&des or extraneous consideration or is against auy statutoiy Rnles or Act, tlie sam.e caiuiot be interfered by a Court of Law. Leaiiied couusel for the petitioner could not poiat out any ;round of inalafide, extraneous considerations or violation of aay statutor\r rules or the Act. The petition deseives to be disiaissed. It is accordiugly disniissed. However, in tiie tacts aad circuiastances of the case siace a representation was liled by tlie petitioner al'ter fhe earlier order dated 2.8.2007 passed by fhis Court aiid iiie sarne has uot been disposed of so far, it is diiccted fhat the concemed autlioritv shall dispose of tiie said representation filed by tlie petitioner at fhe earUest. Wifh tlie above observations, fhis petition stands disposed of. ~ Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge /Raaf ^