RAMCHARAN RATHORE Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the petition is heard finally. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 30 -6 -2009 (Annexure - P/1) whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Balouda to Hannachakar, Jaijaipur, within the district Janjgir -Champa. Learned -counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is bad mainly on the ground that the petitioner was never posted at a place from where he has been transferred i.e. Primary School, Kurma (Balouda). Learned counsel further challenges the impugned transfer order on the ground that there is no administrative exigency in transferring the petitioner from the present place of posting. The transfer order has been passed as a punishment because the petitioner has not allowed the illegal work of private school i.e. conducting examination in the Government School and the said private school was found forged for which FIR was also lodged in Police Station, Balouda. The transfer order has been passed with mala fide intention within a period of one year from the present place of posting, which is contrary to the transfer policy.

(2.) PER contra, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the transfer order has been passed on the basis of administrative exigency and on the recommendation of the concerned In -Charge Minister. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Masood Ahmad vs. State of U.P. and Others : (2007) 8 SCC 150 has upheld that the public representative or the concerned Minister may make recommendation in administrative exigency to transfer the employee from one place to other place. As far as wrong mentioning of the posting place of the petitioner is concerned, learned counsel for the State submits that the said mistake came to the knowledge of the respondent No.2 on 30 -6 -2009 itself and immediately on the same day the said mistake has been rectified by issuing fresh order wherein it has been specifically endorsed a note to the effect that the posting place of the petitioner should be read as Saraital instead of Kurma (Balouda), therefore, the petitioner cannot take the advantage of clerical/typographical mistake. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto. There is nothing to indicate that the transfer order has been passed on account of any complaint made against the petitioner. Even otherwise, in a case of allegation of mala fide, the person against whom mala fide is alleged has to be impleaded as a party -respondent. Thus, the contention of the petitioner with the regard to mala fide action is not found Proved and it is also not further proved that the transfer order has been passed on account of any complaint received against the petitioner. The petitioner has not challenged the transfer order on legally permissible grounds except the afore -stated grounds. There is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned transfer order. The respondent -authorities after noticing the clerical/typographical mistake immediately corrected the posting place of the petitioner and issued the amended transfer order. The same is just, proper and does not warrant any interference of this Court.

(3.) BE that as it may, it is well -settled principle of law that transfer/ posting of an employee is an incidence of service and it is for the employer to decide as to where a particular officer/employee be posted, keeping in view public interest as well as administrative exigency. This Court has limited jurisdiction to interfere with the transfer matter and except in the cases of proved mala fide, non -competence of authority passing the transfer order and not being in conformity with the rules and regulations. (See Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v Damodar Prasad Pandey & Others : (2004) 12 SCC 299). There is no challenge to the impugned order on the ground of breach of statutory provisions also. This is not a case where any permissible grounds as stated above has been raised. Thus, this petition being devoid of merit is liable to be and is accordingly dismissed at the motion stage itself.