IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15829 of 2008 DR.SUNIL KUMAR CHANDRA son of M.P.Chandra, resident of Mohalla Garikhana P.S.Khagaul District Patna. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The Commissioner cum Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.The Deputy Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4 19.1.2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner has challenged transfer order contained in Notification no.1618(2) dated 30.9.2008 whereby he has been transferred from Refral Hospital Sandesh in the district of Bhojpur to Supaul. The order of transfer has been challenged by the petitioner on the ground that this is malafide and in violation of government policy decision to post husband and wife at the same station as well as the resolution of the government to post at one division for six years. Counter affidavit has been filed denying the allegations. So far malafide is concerned vague assertion has been made. No specific allegation against any one has been made and that person has not been made party as such it is not fit for consideration. In the counter affidavit it has been stated that the petitioner has been transferred after completing three years at one place. The transfer order has been passed in the light of the government decision to streamline the functioning of the government hospital. As per resolution no.434 dated 1.3.2007 of cabinet secretariat it is resolved that the persons who have completed three years at one place be transferred to any other place. Regarding post of the petitioner’s wife at Sandesh and also petitioner’s remaining there in the light of the 2 government decision it is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner’s wife is not a government servant but she has been selected to work on contract basis and the government circular which envisages that as far as possible both wife and husband should be posted in the same department has no application in the case of the petitioner. Another submission which has been made by the petitioner’s counsel is that since it is not a routine transfer order passed in the month of June and in case the transfer order has been passed for administrative reason in work exigency then as per government resolution such transfer order needs to be approved by a Superior authority. What I find that there is nothing on the record to show that approval of the higher authority was not there, rather from the impugned order it transpires that transfer order was duly communicated to the Commissioner of the department, the State Minister as well as the Health Minister. It seems that the approval was taken. Considering all these facts and also that the post of the petitioner is transferable and the transfer being a part of service, there is no reason for interfering with the impugned order. Accordingly this application is dismissed. Sss/- (Mridula Mishra, J)