IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.13432 of 2010 Decided on : 30.07.2010 Des Raj ... Petitioner versus State of Punjab & others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Present : Mr. H.S.Sethi, Advocate for the petitioner. **** 1. To be referred to the reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (1) In the instant petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 20.07.2010 (Annexure P-5) passed by the State Government, Department of Local Government. (2) The petitioner is working as Assistant Town Planner, in the Local Body Department, State of Punjab. It is not in dispute that as per the Rules and Service Regulations, he holds a transferable post and can be posted anywhere in the State of Punjab. Vide the impugned order dated 20.07.2010 (Annexure P-5), three officials/officers in services of the Municipal Corporations including the petitioner have been ordered to be transferred to different places. (3) The petitioner alleges that he has been transferred at the instance of respondent No.4, who is the local MLA. It is further alleged that previously also vide order dated 29.09.2008 the petitioner was transferred from Amritsar to Bhatinda and he had challenged that order before this Court in CWP No.17677 of 2008 by alleging mala fide exercise of powers by respondent No.4. This Court stayed the transfer order and thereafter, the writ petition was rendered infructuous as someone else was posted at Bhatinda and thereby, the transfer order of the petitioner was rendered infructuous. It is also alleged that no reply was filed by respondent No.4 in that writ petition. (4) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length. During the course of hearing, it is not denied that the petitioner has already completed the normal tenure of posting at Amritsar. Admittedly, the petitioner holds a transferable post. The impugned transfer order is based upon administrative reasons. Suffice it to say that if the cause of the petitioner's transfer is his 'uprightness', he should carry on that flag wherever he is posted. However, if the petitioner has any other justified or equitable ground including the non-availability of vacancy at Patiala, for his retention at Amritsar, the Writ Court cannot be the appropriate forum to be approached in this regard. This petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to represent before respondents No.1 & 2 and any such representation shall be considered and disposed of by respondents No.1 & 2, preferably within one month, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (5) Disposed of. (6) Dasti. July 30, 2010 (SURYA KANT) sonia JUDGE