CWP No.1209 of 2008. 15.12.2008. Present: Mr. Imran Khan, Advocate, vice counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2. This writ petition has been filed against the transfer of the petitioner. The learned Advocate General informs us that the petitioner is working in Hamirpur District for the last 12 years. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the person who is now coming in place of the petitioner has earlier stayed in Hamirpur District for 10 years. The next contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been transferred without TTA. It has further been contended that no application has been given by the petitioner to transfer him on his request. In such circumstances, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for TTA. The State Government must take full precaution for indicating in the order of transfer whether the person is entitled for TTA or not. Since the petitioner has already overstayed at the place of posting, we do not find any reason to show interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed to the extent that the State Government shall pay TTA to the petitioner in accordance with law. CMP No.1808 of 2008. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, this application stands disposed of. (Jagdish Bhalla), C.J. 15th December, 2008. (Kuldip Singh), J. (tr)