- (1.) This appeal arises out of the order, dated 19-4-1994 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 24936 of 1992 [See, the decision published in (1994)2 UPLBEC 1030], quashing the order of cancellation dated 2-11-1992 cancelling the transfer order, dated 14-10-1992. By the said order the respondent, herein, has been transferred from Hathras (district Aligarh) to Bareilly.
(2.) During the pendency of the special Appeal the appellants, herein, passed another order of transfer dated 14-6-1994 transferring the respondent from Mandi Samiti, Bareilly to the office of the Deputy Director, Mandi Parishad, Bareilly. This order of transfer was again challenged in Writ Petition No. 20296 of 1994. That writ petition was allowed on 23-12-1994. [See, the decision reported in (1995) 2 UPLBEC 1115] Against that order, special Appeal No. 3 of 1995 was filed and it was dismissed on 3-1-1995. [See, the decision reported in (1995) 2 UPLBEC 1121]. It is stated that against the order passed in Special Appeal No. 3 of 1995 special leave petition was filed by the appellants and that too was dismissed by the Supreme Court, [See, the decision reported in (1995) 2 UPLBEC 1122 (SC) In these circumstances, it would not be proper for us to go into the merits of the case as to the validity of the impugned order dated 2-11-1992, In view of the second order of transfer dated 14-6-1994 passed by the appellant, it is not necessary to go into the validity of the first order of transfer dated 14-10-1992.
(3.) It is, however, submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the reasons mentioned by the learned Single Judge while quashing the order of cancellation dated 2-11-1992 are contrary to the well established principles of law as laid down by the Supreme Court in various cases. There can be no dispute or doubt that normally an order of transfer is interfered with only when either it is vitiated by mala fides, or by arbitrary exercise of powers, or it is contrary to any statutory provisions, or the transfer has been effected by way of punishment otherwise it is for the employer to decide whether a particular employee shall be transferred or not having regard to the administrative exigencies and the public interest, if any.;