Anil Kumar, J. - (1.) BY means of the present writ petition, Petitioner has challenged the impugned order of transfer dated 30.6.2003 (Annexure No. 1) passed by Respondent No. 3.
(2.) 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: In our opinion, the courts should not interfere with a transfer order which is made in public interest and for administrative reasons unless the transfer order are made in violation of any mandatory statutory rule or on the ground of mala fide. A government servant holding a transferable post has no vested right to remain posted at one place or the other. He is liable to be transferred from one place to the other. Transfer orders issued by the competent authority do not violate any of his legal rights. Even if a transfer order is passed in violation of executive instructions or orders the courts ordinarily should not interfere with the order instead affected party should approach the higher authorities in the department.
(3.) THE aforesaid view has been reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India another 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.;