Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. Petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the impugned notification dated 24.10.2014 (Annexure -9) issued by the Rural Works Department, Government of Jharkhand whereby the order of his earlier transfer bearing notification No. 3373 dated 13.10.2014 was cancelled. By the said notification dated 13.10.2014 petitioner was transferred from his erstwhile place of posting as Estimating Officer, Rural Works Division, Jamtara to the post of Assistant Engineer, Rural Works Sub -Division, Deoghar. By the same impugned notification (Annexure -9) the earlier order of transfer of respondent No. 6 through notification no. 3300 dated 30.9.2014 from his previous place of posting as Assistant Engineer, Rural Works Sub -Division, Deoghar to the same post of Estimating Officer, Rural Works Division, Jamtara was cancelled. Petitioner claims to have assumed charge on the transferred post at Deoghar which was accepted by the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Division, Deoghar as per Annexure -7 dated 17.10.2014.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that since order of transfer have been acted upon, therefore, such cancellation of the transfer order is in teeth of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Raghubansh Singh v. State of Bihar & Others reported in : 2002(1) JLJR 89 and in the case of Ram Prasad Mahto & Ors. v. The State of Jharkhand & Others reported in : 2003(1) JLJR 427. He has also referred to the judgment rendered by the Patna High Court in the case of Mahmood Azam Siddique v. State of Bihar reported in : 2000(3) PLJR 139. Learned counsel for the respondent -State submitted that the earlier orders with regard to the petitioner was an individual order of transfer. The department upon reconsideration has cancelled the same. It is further submitted that the respondent No. 6 has in the meantime been promoted as an Executive Engineer and it is likely that within a short time, he would be posted on the promoted post at any other place. However, it is also submitted that once the order of transfer has been revoked and the petitioner was also relieved by the office of Executive Engineer, Deoghar through order dated 26.11.2014 to join at Jamtara, no interference may be made in the impugned order.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent No. 6 submitted that the petitioner had unilaterally joined at the transferred place though the said respondent had not been relieved. It is further submitted that the respondent No. 6 having been promoted during the pendency of the writ petition, petitioner may not have any grievance against the said respondent as he is likely to be posted at any other place on his promotion by the respondent -department in the near future. It is further submitted that since the order of transfer has been revoked, the impugned order need not be interfered with.;