IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17810 of 2008 LALIT NARAYAN MISHRA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner ; Mr Chitranjan Sinha, Sr.Advocate with Mr M.K.Pathak, Advocate For the State : AAG III -------- 2. 07.01.2009 Heard leaned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 3.10.2008 transferring him from Jhanjharpur to Sherghati. Learned Counsel submits that earlier on 29.6.2007 the petitioner was transferred from Pandaul to Sherghati. Barely a year latter on 30.6.2008 he was transferred from Sherghati to Jhanjharpur when within approximately three months after fresh orders for transfer have been passed presently assailed. Learned Counsel for the State sought to defend the order of transfer as being a normal incidence of service. Undoubtedly transfer is an incidence of service, but when this administrative power is exercised in a manner which prima facie satisfied this Court of arbitrariness apparent in the conduct itself when no grounds have been urged in the order dated 3.10.2008 to enable this Court to concludes otherwise so as to decline interference this Court finds it difficult to accept the contention on behalf of the State. The aspect of stability in posting of a government servant, so as to enable him to give his best in his duties, needs no emphasis. A government servant mentally disturbed unsure of the next move of the government in transferring him specially at short intervals with no justifiable reasons can hardly be conducive to administrative performance. The impugned order dated 3.10.2008 is accordingly quashed. The writ application stands allowed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)