WP(C) 506/2007 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. I h ave also heard Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State counsel. The petitioner, who was earlier given the charge of a particular Forest Beat is aggrieved by subsequent action of the authority in giving charge of the Beat to the respondent No.5. Be it stated here that both the petitioner and the respondent No.5 have been working as Forester Grade-I. There is no dispute that the respondent No.5 is senior to the petitioner. By Annexure-VII order dated 17.06.2006, the petitioner was transferred a nd posted at Simaluguri Beat as Attached Officer. His such transfer and posting was from Lechai Beat (Camp). The order was modified by Annexure-VIII order dated 21.07.2006, transferring and posting the petitioner at Sonari Range HQ. After the aforesaid orders, the DFO, Sivasagar Division, issued Annexure -IX order dated 14.08.2006, posting the petitioner as Incharge of the Simaluguri Beat. On the other hand, the respondent No.5 was transferred and posted to Lakh mijan Beat as Incharge. After the said order dated 14.08.2006, the DFO by his An nexure-X, letter dated 03.11.2005, addressed to the Conservator of Forests, East ern Assam Circle, Jorhat, pointed out that the respondent No.5 having spent abou t 5(five) years and (8)eight months as Incharge of the Simaluguri Beat in differ ent spells, his case might be considered for inter divisional transfer. The lett er also indicated about placing the respondent No.5 under suspension in the past . Thereafter by Annexure-XI order dated 11.12.2006, the respondent No.5 was also transferred to Simaluguri Beat as an Attached Officer. By that time the petitio ner was posted as Incharge of the Beat. The petitioner is aggrieved by the Annexure-XII order dated 24.01.2007 i ssued in partial modification of the earlier order dated 11.12.2006, posting the respondent No.5 as Incharge of the Simaluguri Beat. It is the case of the petit ioner that having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case and also in view of the fact that the petitioner was already posted to Simaluguri B eat as Incharge by Annexure-IX order dated 14.08.2006, the DFO could not have po sted the respondent No.5 as Incharge of the Beat. Be it stated here that the imp ugned order dated 24.01.2007 has been issued without modifying the order dated 1 4.08.2006, by which the petitioner was posted as Incharge of Simaluguri Beat. The respondent Nos.4 and 5 have filed their counter affidavits. Their co ntention is that since the respondent No.5 is senior to the petitioner, upon tra nsfer and posting of the respondent No.5 to Simaluguri Beat, he had to be made t he Incharge of the Beat. From the materials on record, it appears that when the respondent No.5 w as transferred to Simaluguri Beat as Attached Officer, he made representation to the authority agitating that by such attachment under the petitioner it was vir tual reversion for him. According to the respondents, since the respondent No.5 is senior to the petitioner, it would be unjust to place him as an Attached Officer under the pe titioner. Certain allegations have also been made against the petitioner which t he petitioner has denied by filing reply affidavit. The transfer and posting in respect of both the incumbents were made in June/July 2006. By now almost two years have passed. It is for the authority to decide as to who should be posted where, but in the process they should act reas onably and not arbitrarily. It is in this context, Mr. Sahewalla, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has referred to Annexure-X letter dated 03.11.2005, issued by Divisional Forest Officer, urging for divisional transfer of the respo ndent No.5. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the writ petiti on is disposed of directing the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Assam to resolve the issue by taking into account all relevant aspects of the matter. He may even consider further transfer and posting of both the incumbents, if public interest and administrative exigencies demand the same. The PCCF shall take a d ecision in the matter as expeditiously as possible, preferably by 10.04.2008. Ti ll then, the order of status quo passed on 31.01.2007 shall continue. A copy of this order shall be furnished to Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned S tate Counsel for her communication to the PCCF towards implementation of this or der.