35.wp.5342-09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5342 OF 2009 Lieutenant Colonel R.K. Varma. ..Petitioner. Versus Deputy Military Secretary (MS-11) Military Secretary’s Branch, Army Headquarters, D.H.Q., P.O., New Delhi and others. ..Respondents. ... Mr.R.K. Rai, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.K.R. Chaudhari, Counsel with Mr.N.R. Prajapati, Counsel for the respondent – Union of India. ... CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATE : 8th JULY, 2009. P.C. :- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent – Union of India. Counter affidavit is filed. 2. This Petition is mainly filed challenging the order of respondents transferring the petitioner to Unit – 26, Arty Brigade at Kaluchauk ( State of Jammu & Kashmir). The main grievance of the petitioner is that since his wife is not well and is suffering from certain psychiatric disease and the place to which he has been posted does not have the facility for treatment, therefore, he should be retained at the present posting. 3. Counter affidavit is filed, in which it is stated that the place Kaluchauk where the petitioner has been posted is within 7 k.ms. of an army hospital at Jammu 35.wp.5342-09 2 where a psychiatrist is available. The learned Counsel for the respondents has also assured this Court that in case of any emergency ambulance to the wife of the petitioner would be made available. Counter affidavit further discloses that at the present place i.e. Devlali where the petitioner is posted, no psychiatrist is available with the army, as such the petitioner’s wife could be treated better at the place of posting to which he is now posted at Kaluchauk. 4. The Counsel for the petitioner further argued that the Military Secretary on his earlier representation had passed an order allowing the petitioner to continue at Devlali. It has been explained in the counter affidavit that the petitioner had gone on education leave and education leave was upto 30th April, 2009, however, as the petitioner informed that he would like to join back by 3rd April, 2009 as he had completed his course, therefore, he was allowed to join at Devlali. In the order it was made clear that it would be till further orders. 5. Transfer is an exigency of service and the Courts have been very slow in interfering with the transfer order, more so, in cases of defence forces as the defence forces need a high level of discipline and it is for the authorities of the Army to decide the suitability of a particular officer at a particular station. The petitioner is a high ranking military official who is holding rank of lieutenant colonel and as such would be responsible for various important tasks and decisions and it is his command which will know better where this officer would be suited. Therefore, we do not think any interference is called for. Writ Petition is misconceived. 6. It may also be noted that before trying his luck in this Court, the petitioner had 35.wp.5342-09 3 also approached Civil Court in an original Suit being O.S. Suit No.211 of 2009 and an application for temporary injunction was also filed along with the Suit. The application has been dismissed by the trial Court after elaborate order on 27th May, 2009. The Suit is still pending. Two parallel proceedings cannot go on for the same cause of action. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, considering the fact that the wife of the petitioner is not keeping good health, he may make a fresh representation which may be considered by the concerned authorities afresh keeping in view the overall welfare of the petitioner’s wife. But, this order would not in any way be construed to mean that the petitioner will not join at his new place of posting after the present leave is over. [BILAL NAZKI,J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]