CHHOTEY LAL NAGBANSHI Vs. STATE OF U.P. THROUGH AGRICULUTURE AND 2 ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MATTER has been taken in revised cause list. None appears on behalf of the Petitioner to press the present writ petition. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the opposite parties and perused the record. By means of the present writ petition, the order of transfer dated 10.7.2004 passed by the opposite party No. 3 is under challenge. From the perusal of the record, it is not in dispute that the Petitioner is holding transferable post. The law is well settled that transfer being exigency of service can be effected by the employer concerned in accordance with its administrative exigency, in the interest of administration and public interest at any point of time and that cannot be monitored and guided by this Court unless it may be shown that transfer order is vitiated on account of the contravention of the statute, or lacks jurisdiction or mala fide as such in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors. : 1991 Supp (2) SCC 659 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:

(2.) THE aforesaid view has been reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Anr. v. N.P. Thomas : 1993 Supp (1) SCC 704 and N.K. Singh v. Union of India and Ors. : (1994) 6 SCC 98 holding therein if a person holding a transferable post, is transferred, there is no violation of any statutory/ mandatory rules then the same is not subject to judicial review. Further, in the case of Chief General Manager ( Telecom) N.E. Telecom Circle and Anr. v. Rajendra Ch. Bhattacharjee and Ors. : (1995) 2 SCC 532 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:

(3.) NO order as to costs.