IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10164 of 2008 4 7.11.2008 Lakshmi Prasad Sahu son of late H.N.Sahu resident of Mohalla J-564 Kankarbagh Colony, PS Kankarbagh Distirct Patna Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar. Patna 2. Thee Joint Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar. Patna 3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar. Patna 4. The Under Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar. Patna 5. Sri Shyam Sunder Singh, father name not known to petitioner and posted as Deputy Director, Darbhanga ----- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has challenged his transfer by impugned order dated 19.6.2008 contained in Annexure-7 by which several persons including the petitioner who is a Deputy Director at Patna has been transferred to Magadh Anchal, Gaya. Petitioner has made allegations that he was transferred prematurely against the guidelines issued by the State Government only to accommodate respondent no.5. In spite of notice respondent no.5 has not appeared and has not chosen to contest the writ petition. From a letter of Principal Secretary, Cabinet Coordination Department, Government of 2 Bihar dated 1.10.2008 which has been annexed as Annexure- 14 to a supplementary affidavit it appears that some of the transfers made by the Department in the recent past have been scrutinized by the State Government and cancelled for various reasons. The transfer of the petitioner also finds mentioned in that letter and the same has been ordered to be cancelled within one week because it was found that there were no reasons disclosed in effecting such a transfer on administrative grounds. Learned counsel for the State of Bihar representing the Mines Department where the petitioner is working as Deputy Director, submits that consequential order canceling petitioner’s transfer has not been issued so far because the present writ petition is pending before this Court. In the aforesaid facts, the writ petition is disposed of in view of Annexure -14 to the supplementary affidavit. The consequential order should be issued forthwith. Since the Mines Department has not contested the decision of the Cabinet Department in Annexure-14 hence in the light of said decision and in view of aforesaid direction to issue consequential order forthwith, the writ petition is treated as infractuous. It goes without saying that in the matters of 3 transfer the employer has always the liberty to pass orders in future as per government guidelines and the requirement of the department. (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) sk