C.W.P. No.17408 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.17408 of 2011 Date of Decision.16.09.2011 Karaj Singh son of Gurmej Singh, resident of village Gujjar, Police Station Sadiq, District Faridkot and another .....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab through its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Civil Secretariat, Punjab, Chandigarh and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Karambir Singh Nalwa, Advocate for the petitioners. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioners state that respondent No.4 has been facing a trial for offence under Section 302 IPC and he is still being posted in the very same District where the case is pending. The petitioners are witnesses in the criminal case and it appears that the parties approached this Court and sought for protection against any form of threat at the instance of 4th respondent. The issue whether the 4th respondent could be posted in the same District or he should be posted elsewhere, is a matter relating to service conditions and the decision will be taken by the authorities under whose control the 4th respondent serves. Any direction in the manner sought for by the petitioner requiring the 4th respondent to be transferred out of the District or that any departmental action must be taken against him, would be contrary to the law laid down that in matters of service, there could exist no C.W.P. No.17408 of 2011 -2- public interest litigation. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that it is not a public interest but the petitioners are personally affected. Even say so, a person requiring a transfer order to be issued, cannot be a person, who is a third party to the transfer to be effected only because he apprehends threat to life and liberty from presence of a person in the particular office. 2. The writ petition is not maintainable and it is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 16, 2011 Pankaj*