HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.10734 of 2010 Date: April 30, 2010 Between: Shri Y.C. Reddy (Yemmanuru Chintal Reddy), S/o. Y. Rami Reddy, aged 40 years, Occ: Constable, R/o. NTPC, Simhardi, Visakhapatnam … Petitioner And The Director General, Central Industrial Security Force, CISF Head Quarters, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, and another … Respondents Order: The petitioner, a Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force, who is presently posted at Simhardi, Visakhapatnam, questions the action of the respondents in transferring his services to ISPL, Bharanpur, West Bengal and also not considering his representation dated 16-02-2010, by which he requested the respondents to retain him at the present station. 2. The petitioner, who joined Central Industrial Security Force as Constable in the year 1989, served at different places and posted at Simhadri Vizag in the year 2007. While so, he was informed by the second respondent, Commandant, CISF, NTPC, Simhadri, Visakhapatnam, that he is posted to ISPL, Bharanpur, West Bengal and that he has to report at the said station by 30-04- 2010. It is the case of the petitioner that while he, along with certain other personnel, was on election duty and proceeding to Baroda, Gujarat, the bus which they were traveling in, was blown up by a landmine by extremists and in the said incident he lost his left eye and also sustained injuries. It is stated that the children of the petitioner are studying at Visakhapatnam and Hyderabad. Explaining his difficulties, the petitioner filed representation dated 16-02-2010 to the first respondent, Director General, CISF, New Delhi, and requested to retain him at NTPC, Simhadri, Visakhapatnam. The said representation is stated to be pending consideration. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. Ashok Goud, learned Asst. Solicitor General, appearing on behalf of the respondents. 4. In this case, the petitioner, a constable of Central Industrial Security Force, was posted from one station to the other on administrative grounds. He questions his transfer to Transfer ISPL, Bharanpur, West Bengal. It is to be seen that transfer is an incidence of service. An employee working on a transferable post has no vested right to remain posted at a particular place. It is the choice of the employer to determine, as to the place and for how long, the services of an employee are required. A transfer order cannot be interfered with, which is made for administrative reasons, unless the same is made in violation of any mandatory statutory rule or on the ground of mala fides. The transfer order issued by the respondents does not violate any of the legal rights of the petitioner. Hence, I see no illegality in the action of the respondents in transferring the services of the petitioner. However, as the petitioner has filed representation dated 16-02- 2010 to the first respondent, requesting to retain him at the present station, due to his personal problems, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 16-02-2010, take an appropriate decision as expeditiously as possible and communicate the same to him. 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) April 30, 2010 MRR