IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6612 of 2010 1. SUSHILA SINHA WIDOW OF LATE BRAJESHWAR PRASAD R/O VILL PRANPURA, P.S.DALSINGSARAI, DISTT-SAMASTIPUR – Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR , THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION BIHAR, PATNA 3. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION BEGUSARAI – Respondents. ----------- 2 26.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by her transfer order contained in Annexure 12, issued vide memo no. 1093, dated 1.10.2009 by which she has been transferred as Lecturer in a Training School at Sheohar. The main challenge to the order is that the order has been passed without application of mind because it indicates that the petitioner is working in the Child Development Office and as she could not be relieved from the said office, she is now being adjusted and posted at Sheohar. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Annexure 2, dated 3.4.2007 by which the petitioner was transferred to Begusarai as Block Education Extension Officer. The said order remained in abeyance due to certain intervening facts and perhaps due to an order of the High court. Eventually the petitioner claimed that she was relieved vide Annexure 4, dated 30.1.2009. Vide Annexure 8, the petitioner was again transferred to North Begusarai as Block Education Extension Officer. Ultimately, because of creation of new blocks etc. the petitioner could not join the place of transfer vide 2 Annexure 8 and as such Annexure 9 was issued transferring her to Samukaha, Begusarai on the said post. The present order has been issued with respect to eleven persons including the petitioner transferring her to Sheohar. There is no illegality in the order concerned. The objection raised by the petitioner that the transfer order shows non- application of mind as the petitioner has been treated to be working in the office of Integrated Child Development Scheme is hardly an illegality, which can be treated as a ground for setting aside the order of transfer. Counsel for the petitioner lastly submits that the petitioner is to retire in eight months’ time and that the Director, Primary Education, Bihar should consider this aspect of the matter and post the petitioner on her choice place of posting. For this purpose the petitioner can always make a representation before the Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order, dated 1.10.2009 contained in Annexure 12. This writ petition is dismissed. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)