IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1793 of 2010 RAJENDRA RAI, son of late Dukha Rai, resident of village- Jhauhadi, P.O. Sonbarsa, P.S. Sitamarhi, at present posted as Accountant-cum-Store Keeper, Rural Industry Training Centre, Motihari, P.O. Motihari, P.S. Motihari Town, District- East Champaran. …..Petitioner/ Appellant. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. The Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Director of Industry, New Secretariat, Baily Road, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran. 5. The District Development Commissioner, Motihari, East Champaran. 6. The General Manager, District Industry Centre, Motihari, East Champaran. ….Respondents/Respondents. ----------- For the Appellant: Mr. Sunil Kumar No.III, Advocate. For the S t a t e: Mr. K.P. Gupta, S.C. 16 with Mr. Anwar Karim, A.C. to S.C.16. ******** 03- 28.01.2011 The appellant has filed the instant appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna against the order dated 30.8.2010, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.13322 of 2010, whereby the writ application filed by the appellant has been dismissed. 2. The appellant had been transferred from Rural Industries Training Centre, Motihari, to District Industries Centre, Jamui, by order bearing Memo no.1711, dated 30.6.2010. The appellant states that he received the impugned order in the month of October, 2010. He has assailed the impugned order on two counts. Firstly, that he has attained the age of 59 years and is going to retire with effect from 30.6.2012. The appellant further submits that after the impugned order dated 30.6.2010 was passed, he has been reverted from Class-III post to Class-IV post. The learned Single Judge in his order has observed that transfer and posting are the privilege of the administrator, specially when the petitioner himself acknowledges that he has remained stationed at Motihari on different posts since 1997. 3. The counsel for the State opposes the prayer of the appellant. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and the State, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 30.8.2010, passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.13322 of 2010. This appeal is accordingly dismissed. It is open to the authorities to consider the matter regarding salary in accordance with law. (S K Katriar, J.) (S.P. Singh, J.) S.K.Pathak/