IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1977 of 2010 1. Devendra Prasad, S/O Late Shiv Narayan Prasad, R/O Vill.- Mozafara, P.S.- Islampur, Distt.- Nalanda……………………………………….Appellant. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Co-operative, Bihar, Patna 3. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, New Secretariat, Patna… ….Respondents-Respondents ----------- 3. 03-11-2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. Pursuant to an order of transfer whereby in course of a chain transfer, the appellant was shifted from office of District Co- operative Officer, Gaya to the office of Joint Registrar of Co- operative, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga, he was relieved from Gaya office on 08.01.2003 but he remained absent and did not join the transferred post till 07.10.2003. In the meantime, on 19.8.2003 a proceeding was initiated against him for disobedience of order of transfer and unauthorized absence. The Enquiry Officer submitted report against the appellant and on the basis of such report dated 17.10.2003 a minor punishment was imposed upon the appellant on 27.5.2004. This punishment order was challenged before the Writ Court which has dismissed writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No. 7126 of 2003 by order under appeal dated 29.8.2003. There is no other defence available to the appellant except a plea that before this Court in course of hearing and 2 disposal of C.W.J.C. No. 7126 of 2003 which was preferred against rejection of his representation in respect of transfer order dated 31.12.2002, the contention advanced on behalf of the appellant that he had not been officially served with the order of transfer is noted in the final order dated 29.8.2003 (Annexure-6). According to the learned counsel for the appellant, since officially the transfer order was received by the petitioner on 04.09.2003, there was no in-subordination on his part because he joined at Darbhanga on 7.10.2003. The aforesaid plea was considered by the Appellate Authority which rejected his appeal on 17.6.2005 vide Annexure-10. The Appellate Authority has noticed that he filed two writ petitions challenging his transfer as well as rejection of his representation against transfer order so he was fully aware of the transfer order and as appears from Annexure-6 it was annexed before this Court in both the writ petitions preferred in the year 2003. In our view also the charge in the proceeding cannot fail only on the ground that the appellant received the transfer order officially after dismissal of his writ petition as well as representation against order of transfer. This defence was not raised before the Enquiry Officer before whom he took the defence that he was not served with the order relieving him from the charge at Gaya on 08.01.2003. In that context, the Enquiry Officer has held the grievance to be baseless because as per 3 register, he had refused to accept the relieving order which was sent to him through a Peon along with entry in the register. In the facts and circumstances of the case, in our view also no interference is warranted with the order of minor punishment in view of clear facts and circumstances showing that the appellant chose not to accept the transfer order and did not join at the transferred place for a number of months, although he was well aware of the transfer order and challenged the same before this Court as well as before the authorities through representation but without success. It may usefully be indicated here that as per settled policy of the State Government, an employee on transfer is required to join the transferred place and then he may file a representation. We find no merit in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Mkc/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)