Dilip Kumar Seth, J. - (1.) IN this case the petitioner challenges the order of transfer dated 12.7.1996 on the ground that the order of transfer though was passed on 19.7.1996 but was sent to the office of Executive Engineer, P.W.D. on 20.7.1996, in violation of the guideline for transfer order dated 23.4.96 as contained in Annexure -2 to the writ petition inasmuch as according to Clause 4 of the said guideline the transfer order is to be completed by 19th July, 1996 so as to enable the transferred incumbents to take over the charge by 20th July, 1996. According to Mr. Sanjay Kumar the transfer order has reached to the incumbent on 20th July, 1996 as such the same is violative of the said guideline and as such cannot be sustained. Secondly he contends that the alleged transfer has been made on the basis of certain complaint. But according to him transfer on administrative reasons on the complaint can be made only on the ground mentioned in the guideline contained in Annexure -2. According to him even if there is serious complaint or indiscipline even then only after proper consideration the order of transfer could be passed and no order of transfer could be passed casually on motivated complaint. The two grounds cannot go together inasmuch as if it is general transfer within 19th July, 1996 in that event it cannot be an administrative transfer on the hand it is not motivated. From the order of transfer dated 12.7.1996, the impugned order, in the writ petition it does not appear that the transfer was made on the ground of administrative reasons on the basis of complaint. Therefore, Mr. Sanjay Kumar has to confine to his first ground.
(2.) ADMITTEDLY annexure -2 is the guideline which is to be followed. A minor deviation does not render the order of transfer invalid nor vitiate the same. It appears that the order of transfer was passed on 19.7.1996 and the same has reached on 20.7.1996, in the office where the petitioner worked. That it does not make the order invalid simply because it is late by one day. The guideline is a principle to be followed and guiding factor which is directory in nature, the same cannot be treated mandatory to the extent as Mr. Sanjay Kumar wants to interpret. Therefore, in my view, there is no merit in the present case and as such the writ petition is dismissed. There will, however, be no order as to costs. Certified copy of this order may be given to the learned counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges within seven days.;