MOHD. FIROZ KHAN Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner has filed this petition impugning of the transfer order dated 06.07.07 (Annexure P/2) whereby, the Petitioner, (sic) as Coach was transferred from Government Gurukul Vidyalaya, (sic) Road, District Bilaspur to Boys Sports Campus. Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, on administrative exigency, (ii) order dated 14.11.07, whereby, the Petitioner was directed to comply with the earlier transfer order dated 06.07.07 and (iii) order dated 01.02.06 passed by the Secretary, Govt, of Chhattisgarh, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Development, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG) whereby, the representation of the Petitioner was dismissed. According to Mohd. Firoz Khan, Petitioner in person, the Respondents are annoyed with the Petitioner because of filing writ petitions, being W.P. Nos. 2199/03 and 2256/05 and punished the Petitioner on false ground by transferring the Petitioner from the present place of posting to the Boys Sports Campus, Narayanpur, showing on administrative ground. THE Petitioner has initially filed W.P. No. 4297/06 (Mohd. Firoz Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.) impugning the transfer order dated 06.07.07 which is again under challenge in the instant petition. THE earlier petition, W.P. No. 4297/06 was withdrawn on 25.307.2007 with liberty to make a representation. THEreafter, the Petitioner made a representation to the authority concerned.

(2.) THE Petitioner again filed a writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 7705/07 seeking disposal of the representation, pending consideration before the Deputy Secretary, Scheduled Tribes & Scheduled Castes Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Raipur and further impugning the order dated 14.11.07 (Annexure P/4) whereby the Petitioner was directed to comply with the order dated 06.07.07. THE said order is again impugned in this petition. This Court, on 03.01.08, disposed of the W.P. (S) No. 7705/07 holding that since the representation was not decided, the order directing the Petitioner to comply with the transfer order cannot be taken as order passed on the representation. THE Respondent No. 1 was accordingly directed to consider his pending representation and pass appropriate order in accordance with rules within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. THE Respondent No. 1 considered the case of the Petitioner at length and observed as under:

(3.) LEGAL position in case of transfer is well established that Court should exercise its jurisdiction only in case of proved malafide, non-competence of the officer passing the order, violation of rules and regulations, applicable to the employees. In case of E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu and Anr. : 1974 (4) SCC 3 the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under: