WPSS No. 335 of 2010 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. M.S.Chauhan, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Pandey, the learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioner has been transferred by the impugned order dated 19.4.2010. The petitioner contends that the transfer order was in violation of the Government Policy, which indicates that a person cannot be transferred before five years and further that an employee who is on the verge of retirement should be allowed to retire from that station. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is clear that the Government Policies are not finding even upon the Government itself and that it is not necessary that the petitioner should complete the minimum period as stipulated in the policy before being transferred. In exigency of service even without waiting of the expiry of the period, an employee can be transferred. The Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. and others Vs. Gobardhan Lal reported in A.I.R. 2004 Supreme Court 2165 has held that the transfer order should not be interfered with even if it was in violation of the guidelines issued by the Government. The court finds that the representation of the petitioner has also been rejected, This court does not find any error in the transfer order. In view of the aforesaid, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief. The writ petition is dismissed. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated: 13.5.2010 Nishant