IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15656 of 2009 1. GAURI SHANKAR PASWAN S/O LATE JADDU PASWAN VILLAGE AND P.O.- DHURGAON, P.S.- EKANGARSARAI, DISTT.- NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF - CUM - ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER – CUM - SPECIAL SECRETARY R.C.D., BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE UNDER SECRETARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER CENTRAL DESIGN ORGANISATION, R.C.D., BIHAR, PATNA ----------- 2. 19.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner has been transferred by an order dated 11.11.2009 from Patna to Purnia as an employee of the Road Construction Department. His date of superannuation from service is 30.11.2009. Learned counsel submits that the transfer is contrary to logic and reason more so when Government circulars themselves provide that such transfers are generally to be avoided in the last year of service. The case of the petitioner does not even come in the last month but days of service. This Court is not persuaded to adjourn the matter for a counter affidavit. Government circulars regulating transfer and postings are issues to be followed by the Government fairly and reasonably and not at whims and fancies. If a circular provides for a particular contingency and the desirable cause of action, there have to be sufficient, 2 cogent and convincing reasons for deviation from what the circular contemplates as a desired course of action. Government circulars are not to be followed and rejected at convenience, but also have enforceability. In 1982 PLJR 180 (Shiv Lochan Jha vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) a Division Bench of this Court has held that the State Government is bound by its own circulars and instructions, unless the State Government withdraws such circulars and instructions and assumes of power itself. The writ petition is disposed with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation forthwith before the respondent no. 3 for re-consideration of the order of transfer in light of the Government circular. Respondent no. 3 is required to dispose off the representation by a reasoned and speaking order displaying complete transparency in decision vis-à-vis the government circulars to facilitate judicial review of the order, should the need arise. In the peculiar facts of the present case, this court considers it proper to further observe that fairness and reasonableness on part of the Government as an employer requires them not to take any coercive action against the petitioner till disposal of such representation. The writ application stands disposed off. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)