IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.19588 of 2010 Maheshwar Mishra, S/o Late Nagendra Mishra, resident of Village- Mahanth Manihari, P.S.- Mahanth Manihari, District-Muzaffarpur. ….Petitioner. Versus 1. The Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 2. Central Industrial Security Force through its Director General, CGOs Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 3. Special Director General, Airport Security, Central Industrial Security Force, CGOs Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 4. Deputy Inspector General, Central Industrial Security Force, CGOs Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 5. Deputy Inspector General, Airport, Central Industrial Security Force, E & NE HQrs Kolkata. ….Respondents. ----------- 8. 08.09.2011 Heard Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pathak for the respondents Union of India and its officials. Petitioner is the Deputy Commandant serving the Central Industrial Security Force (C.I.S.F.). He is aggrieved by the order dated 9th October 2010 (Annexure -6), passed/ issued under the signature of Asstt. Inspector General Personnel, C.I.S.F. whereby six personnels of different categories including the petitioner was/were transferred. By the said order, the petitioner, who was serving at Gaya Air Port in Aviation Security Group, was transferred to Second R.E.S. Battallion, Ranchi. It is the case of the petitioner that he filed a representation thereagainst which was rejected by communication dated 18th November, 2010 (Annexure-8). Petitioner filed another representation which was considered and rejected vide order contained in Annexure-10. The petitioner 2 again made representation which was considered and rejected by the communication contained in Annexure-10. On perusal of the pleadings made in the writ petition, it appears that sustainability of order of transfer has been challenged on the ground that the same would cause undue hardship to petitioner who is scheduled to retire in the year 2012. A further ground has been taken that the petitioner has been suffering from heart ailments and as such he is in dire need of medical treatment. It is also found that challenge to the order was also made on the ground that within one and half years of his posting the respondents seek to transfer him from Gaya to Ranchi. A Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein, it is stated that Gaya Air port, where the petitioner was serving as the Deputy Commandant, is Naxal prone areas and due to his medical health status, his continuation at the Air port was not deemed expedient. It is also contended that the petitioner would get better medical facility at Ranchi. On going through the pleadings made in the writ petition as well as the reply affidavit and after hearing the counsel for both the parties, it appears that challenge with regard to Annexure-6 has been made precisely on the ground that the same has been passed in breach of the guidelines issued by the respondents. Petitioner has not been able to demonstrate that in effecting such transfer any statutory provision has been violated 3 and/or breached and /or he has been reduced in status or rank in any manner. In a matter of transfer which is an incidence of service, the Court would exercise its extra ordinary and discretionary writ jurisdiction only when it is shown that the same has been passed in breach of any statutory provision. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate the same. The contention of the petitioner that during the pendency of the proceeding he has been found medically fit by the doctor, in my view, has no material bearing on the case. This writ application is dismissed. Kamlesh (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)