FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8542 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 8589 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mr. N.L. Jadhav, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Gajanan Kadam Advocate for respondent No.3 in WP8589 of 2011 Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 Mr . A.D. Mane, Advocate h/f. Pavan Uttarwar, Advocate for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in WP8542 of 2011 CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATE :- 22ND DECEMBER, 2011. PER COURT :- 1] The limited grievance of the petitioners is that while transferring the petitioners, respondent No.3 has not taken into consideration the policy of couple convenience adopted by the Government. 2] Needless to state that Govt. Resolution dated 29/3/2001 itself provides that as far as possible the husband and wife should be placed at the same place, and if it is not possible both of them should be placed within the radius of 30 Km. from the posting of each other. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8542 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 8589 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 3] We, therefore, direct the respondent No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioners in the light of the aforesaid Govt. Resolution and if there vacancy available at a place within a radius of 30 kms. from the place of posting of the respective husband of the petitioners, at the time of general transfers being made in April 2012, the petitioners be considered for appointment at such places. Writ petitions stand disposed of. [M.T. JOSHI,J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] grt/-