IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7801 OF 2010 Yuvraj s/o Daulat Mailagir ... PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri V.D.Sapkal, advocate for the petitioner Shri N.B.Khandare, G.P. for respondent nos. 1 to 3 Shri S.U.Choudhary, advocate for respondent no. 4 ...... CORAM: R.S. MOHITE & SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ. DATED: 1st September, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to quash and set aside the order dated 16.6.2010, passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Aurangabad, in Original Application No. 364 of 2010, filed by present respondent no.4 impugning his transfer order dated 13.5.2010. By the afore said order dated 13.5.2010, present respondent no.4 was transferred from the post of Tahsildar, Shahada to the post of Tahsildar, Kopargaon, which was then occupied by the present petitioner. 3 We have seen the two orders. Admitted position is that both the orders have been made during mid term. This can also be seen from the fact that the present petitioner had been posted at Kopargaon on 3.9.2009 and respondent no. 4 has been posted at Shahada on 28.4.2008. 4 Once it is admitted position that the postings were mid tenure, then though there is discretion in the Government to effect the transfer, there is no reason given as to why the transfer was effected mid tenure. If no such explanation whatsoever is given, in spite of opportunity, then it is possible to draw a conclusion that there was degree of arbitrariness in the present case. In the present case, the orders merely stated that the transfers were effected for administrative reasons. We have not been shown any stand taken to justify the contention that the transfers were for administrative reason. 5 In this view of the matter, Original Application NO. 364 of 2010 has been allowed by giving detail reasons. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere in writ jurisdiction. The petition is summarily dismissed. We, however, make it clear that this will not preclude the State from taking proper action in accordance with law. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) dbm/wp7801.10