IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. Writ Petition No. 3669 (S/S)2001 (Old no. 30472 of 1998) Chand Ram S/o Sadhu Ram, Resident of Koti (Kanasar), Chakrauta, District Dehradun. ---- Petitioner. Vs. 1. State of U.P., 2. District Magistrate, Dehradun, 3. Zila Udhyan Adhikari (District Horticulture Officer), Dehradun, 4. Up Nideshak, Udhyan Evam Khadya Prasanskaran, Garhwal Mandal, Pauri, 5. Nideshak, Udhyan Evam Khadya Prasanskaran, Uttar Pradesh (Parvatiya) Udhan Bhawan, Chaubatiya, Ranikhet, District Almora, 6. Zila Adhyan Adhikari, Chamoli. ----Respondents. Sri B.P. Nautiyal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Paresh Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Heard Sri R.P. Nautiyal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Paresh Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand/respondents. By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.01.1998/12.08.1998 (annexure no.6 to the writ petition) passed by the Deputy Director Udhyan Evam Khadya Prasanskaran, Garhwal Mandal, Pauri transferring the petitioner, who was working as Gardner at Chakrauta, district Dehradun, to district Chamoli. The impugned order was assailed by the petitioner mainly on two grounds. Firstly, the impugned order comes under the category of frequent transfer, as the petitioner has been transferred a number of times within 2 a period of six months. Secondly, the petitioner is a class IV employee and he cannot be transferred outside the district, whereas he has been transferred from district Dehradun to district Chamoli. Considering these facts, the Allahabad High Court on 21st September 1998 has stayed operation of the impugned transfer order and on the basis of this stay order, the petitioner is still working in the district Dehradun. In the writ petition, after being received by transfer from Allahabad High Court, this Court issued notices to the respondents but the respondents did not file any counter affidavit so far. Normally, a Class IV employee cannot be transferred outside a district, because this class of employees is a district cadre post, but in my opinion, in the special circumstances, the Regional Authority can transfer such employee from one district to another on administrative grounds. If the Authority is in possession of any substance against an employee, which warrants transfer on administrative ground, then in that case he may take action for transfer of the employee to some other place, preferably within the same district. The petitioner has already availed the benefit of stay order for 9 years and he cannot be permitted to avail the benefit furthermore. In the circumstances, if the authority concerned finds some material for transfer of the petitioner outside the district and the Rules permits that a Class IV employee can be transferred from one district to another, in that case the 3 respondents are free to take action in the matter for making transfer of the petitioner. With these directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs. (M.M. Ghildiyal, J.) April 26, 2007: NCM: