WPSS No.56 of 2003 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. Lalit Miglani, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, the learned senior counsel for the High Court. The petitioner was transferred from the High Court of Uttarakhand, Nainital to the judgeship of Haridwar. The petitioner, being aggrieved, has filed the present writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the transfer order was not passed in the administration of justice, but, was passed on the basis of a complaint being made against the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that such transfer could not have been made and if there was a complaint, a show cause notice or an opportunity of hearing should have been provided to the petitioner, which has not been done in the instant case. Counter affidavit reveals that the petitioner was not an employee of the High Court, but, an employee of the judgeship of Haridwar and that the petitioner was transferred to the High Court of Uttarakhand, Nainital on exigency of services by way of deputation. Since his performance was not found upto the mark, the petitioner was transferred back to the judgeship of Haridwar. In my view, if the performance of the petitioner was not upto the mark, he was rightly repatriated to the parent department. There is no illegality in the transfer order. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he was transferred on the basis of a complaint is bereft of merit. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 29.06.2010 LSR