1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 4067/2010 M/s. Rahul Ishwardas Gajbhiye ..vs.. State Bank of India and anr. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Rajnish Vyas, Advocate for petitioner. CORAM:- S. A. BOBDE & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED:- AUGUST 31, 2010 1. The petitioner has challenged the transfer of his services as MMGS-II, State Bank of India, Kamptee to Nagpur. It appears that initially by order dated 30.07.2010, the petitioner’s services were transferred from Kamptee to Nagpur. By another order of the next date, it appears that some corrections were made and the services are transferred from Kamptee to Nagpur but to the Region-1, Administrative Office. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the transfers are without authority of law since they have been passed by Regional Manager. However, the learned counsel fairly accepts that the transfers are within the region as Kamptee and Nagpur both are within the same region. 2 2. In view of above, we find that the transfer by Regional Manger is within the powers conferred on him by e-Circular, P&HRD, Sl.No.:239/2008-09, Circular No:CDO/ P&HRD-PHRD/36/2008-09, dated 29.07.2008, which confers the powers of transfer within the region on the concerned Regional Manager. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the representation of the petitioner has not been considered. The representation may be considered by the respondents, however, that is no ground for interfering with the transfer order. The writ petition is devoid of substance. The same is, therefore, rejected. JUDGE JUDGE kahale