WP(C) 2836/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Head Mr. I. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H.K. Sarma, le arned Standing Counsel, Assam State Electricity Board (for short hereinafter ref erred to as the Board). In impugnment is the order dated 14.05.2011 passed by the Chief General Manager (HR) APGCL transferring the petitioner from Namrup to Jagiroad as mentioned ther ein. The pleaded case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he in the capacity o f Junior Manager (Civil) was transferred to the Office of the General Manager, N TPC, APGCL, Namrup vide order 06.04.2010, where he duly took charge thereafter. On the turn of the year, by the impugned order he has been transferred again to Jagiroad. Being aggrieved he has, meanwhile, submitted a representation on 25.0 5.2011 before the Chief General Manager (HR), APGCL, Bijuli Bhawan, Paltan Bazar , Guwahati , in substance, seeking a review of the place of his posting from Jag iroad to Guwahati. The said representation is still pending, though the deadlin e of his joining time fixed as 06.06.2011 is approaching. Mr. Choudhury has argued that the impugned order of transfer is not sustainable in law, and on facts, in view of its close proximity with the arrangement whereu nder he had been posted at Namrup a little more than a year back. That the impug ned order of transfer if implemented would add to his problems has been sought t o be highlighted by referring two pending litigations involving him in the Court s at Jorhat and Dibrugarh. Mr. Sarma, on the other hand, has argued with reference to the petitioner’s repr esentation that the challenge is frivolous as he is willing to come to Guwahati in place of Jagiroad. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the p leas raised in the petition as well as in the aforementioned representation, I a m inclined to sustain the objection raised on behalf of the respondents. The req uest made in the representation is visibly in departure from the grounds sought to be urged in support of the challenge to his impugned transfer. As it is, tra nsfer being an incidence of service, the scope of interference therewith is very limited. The petition is thus dismissed. Be that as it may, as the petitioner has expressed his inclination to be posted at Guwahati in place of Jagiroad, it is left to the concerned respondent authori ty, if advised to attend to this request of his. It is made clear, that no dire ction to the respondents is being issued hereby in this regard. No costs.