WP(C) 5105/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned senior counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. J. Patwary, learned Standing Counsel, PWD. The petitioner is aggrieved by the Annexure-3 order dated 21.9.2011 by w hich he has been transferred from Nagaon State Road Division to Morigaon Rural R oad Division. According to the petitioner, since he wanted to get mutual transfe r with Abu Helal Md. Jakir Hussain, who was posted at Mayong Section of Morigaon Rural Road Division, he ought to have been posted to that division only instead of posting him in Technical Branch at Morigaon. By the impugned transfer order, the request of the petitioner for his tr ansfer to Morigaon from Nagaon has been accepted. However, the same is not in ex change of said Shri Abu Helal Md. Jakir Hussain but in exchange of Shri Golap Ch andra Medhi (respondent No. 6). But the fact of the matter is that the petitione r has been accommodated at Morigaon as per his request. Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since t he petitioner wanted his transfer against the Division and the post being held b y Shri Abu Helal Md. Jakir Hussain, his transfer to Morigaon in place of respond ent No.6 is tenable. Mr. Sarmah, Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that since the mutual transfer that was proposed by said Shri Jakir and the pet itioner has not materialized, the petitioner would like to forego his earlier pr oposal for mutual transfer and that the petitioner may be allowed to submit effe ctive representation to the authority seeking cancellation of the impugned trans fer order. In view of the above, the petitioner is allowed to make a representation against the impugned order dated 21.9.2011 within 15(fifteen) days from today. In the event of making such representation, the authority may dispose of the sam e in accordance with law as quickly as possible but at any rate not later then t wo weeks. Till then status quo as on today shall be maintained. However, if the petitioner fails to make the representation, the directions contained in this or der shall be ignored. Since the writ petition has been disposed of in absence of respondent No .6, no adverse order shall be passed without hearing him. With the above directions and observations, the writ petition stands dis posed off, without however, any order as to costs.