CW 8554/07 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.8554/2007 Paras Chand Jain Versus State & Ors. Date of Order ::: 09/02/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Amit Jindal, for petitioner Mr. AK Pareek, for respondent No.6 Mr. Chetan Bairwa, Addl. Govt. Counsel for respondent State Petitioner while working as Machine Operator under Land Settlement Officer, Jaipur since 14/12/01, was transferred to Tonk, vide order dt.15/07/06 (Ann.1). He earlier approached this Court by way of CWP-5532/06 which was decided vide order dt.12/04/07 directing him to make representation before the authority which passed order of transfer impugned, inviting attention to consider the same sympathetically – pursuant to which, he submitted representation. It appears that by that time, contempt petition- 209/07 was filed; as such final order could not have been passed. Contempt petition was decided on 16/08/07 ((Ann.7). His representation was considered in details vide order dt.05/07/07 (Ann.6) and thereafter petitioner was relieved vide order dt.04/10/07 (Ann.8) pursuant to order of his transfer (Ann.1). Indisputably, petitioner was posted at Jaipur since 14/12/01 and was transferred after CW 8554/07 //2// almost five years of his having worked at Jaipur vide order dt.15/07/06 (Ann.1). Once petitioner remained posted at one place for last more than 5-6 years, certainly in administrative exigency, he can always be transferred particularly while holding transferable post. Even otherwise, transfer is an incidence of service and the authority is competent to transfer an employee in the administrative interest and so also in exigency of service. Order of transfer impugned does not affect service conditions of petitioner and no malice has been imputed against the authority which passed the order impugned. At the same time, violation of any statutory rules has also not been alleged. That apart, it has been informed that petitioner has joined at the place of his posting on transfer at Tonk. In the facts placed on record, this Court does not find justification to interfere with the transfer. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.2/8554CW07-9Fb-Trns.doc