Patna High CourtL.P.A/552/2015disposed

Manindra Kumar Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-04-21The Chief Justice,Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.552 of 2015 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18846 of 2014 =========================================================== Manindra Kumar Sinha, son of Late Sarjug Prasad, Resident of Village Kajichak, Police Station - Sarmera, Post Office - Ramnathpur, District - Nalanda. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Nalanda.

2. The Block Development Officer, Sarmera Block, Police Station - Sarmera, District - Nalanda.

3. The District Education Officer, Nalanda at Biharsharif.

4. The Block Education Officer, Sarmera Block, Police Station - Sarmera, District - Nalanda.

5. The Pramukh (President of Employment Unit, Sarmera), Police Station - Sarmera, District - Nalanda.

6. The Headmaster, Adarsh Sankool Middle School, Kajichak, Police Station - Sarmera, District - Nalanda.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vidya Sagar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ram Balak Mahto, Advocate General =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 21-04-2015 The appellant was working as a teacher in the Middle

Patna High Court LPA No.552 of 2015 dt.21-04-2015 2/2 School, Kajichak of Nalanda district since 2003. He has been transferred to the Middle School, Chero of the same district through order dated 11.10.2014 passed by the Block Development Officer, Sermera, Nalanda. The petitioner challenged the order of transfer by filing CWJC No.18846 of 2014. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Hence, this appeal.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents.

It is fairly well settled that transfer is an incidence of service and no employee can claim to work at a particular place throughout the service. Further, the appellant was working in the same institution for the past more than one decade. The distance between the two places is said to be hardly fifteen kilometers. It cannot be said that any serious hardship is caused to the appellant. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal.

Interlocutory application, if any, shall stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

(L. Narasimha Reddy, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) Sunil/- U