bsb IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 9341 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 9341 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 9341 OF 2007 Madhu Appukuttan ... Petitioner v/s Union of India & ors. ... Respondents Mr.Saikumar Ramamurthy for the petitioner. Mr.Y.S.Bhatye for the respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: J.N.PATEL & J.N.PATEL & J.N.PATEL & SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. DATED: DATED: DATED: 28TH FEBRUARY, 2008 28TH FEBRUARY, 2008 28TH FEBRUARY, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner has challenged the order of transfer dated 7.12.2001 while under suspension on two grounds, first, relating to the authority competent to transfer and second, that during the period of suspension the petitioner cannot be transferred. 3. The petitioner was suspended as he was arrested and detained in custody in connection with Boarijore (Lalmatia) Police Station, Case No.68 of 1993 for having committed offence under Sections 364, 302, 201 and 34 of Indian Penal Code which is in the State of 2 Zarkhand. By the impugned order, the petitioner stand transferred from Nhava Sheva Port Trust where he was posted at the time of his arrest. It is the case of the petitioner that he was not arrested but has surrendered on 26.9.2007. Whatever may be the case, we find that the transfer of the petitioner from Nhava Sheva Port Trust to the 1ST RB Barwaha which is in the State of Madhya Pradesh and is headquarter of the Centre is in larger public interest. It will further facilitate the ptitioner to attend the criminal trial pending against him. 4. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances which led to the arrest and detention of the petitioner, we do not find it proper for this Court to interfere with the impugned order of transfer. 5. Insofar as the contention of the petitioner that the transfer order has not been passed by the competent authority is concerned, we do not find any merits in the matter as the transfer order is issued by the Director General who is duly authorised. 6. Petition stands dismissed. Interim orders stand vacated. 3 (SMT.NISHITA (SMT.NISHITA (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.) MHATRE, J.) MHATRE, J.) (J.N.PATEL, (J.N.PATEL, (J.N.PATEL, J.) J.) J.)