IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINTAL Writ Petittion No. 1770 of 2007 (S/S) Nanda Ballabh Rekhari S/o Sri Tara Dutt Rekhari R/o Veterinary Pharmacist, Veterinary Hospital, Basot, Almora. ………… Petitioner Versus 1. Deputy Director Veterinary Department Kumaon Mandal, Nainital. 2. Chief Veterinary Officer Almora. ………… Respondents Mr. Tumul Nailwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the respondents. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent State. 2) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 29.11.2007, whereby he has been transferred from Veterinary Hospital, Basot, District Almora to Veterinary Hospital, Garur, District Bageshwar. 3) Brief facts of the case are that vide order dated 09.08.2007, the petitioner was posted as Veterinary Pharmacist in Veterinary Hospital, Bhikiasen, Almora. It appears that the petitioner was earlier transferred from said place to Veterinary Hospital, Garur, District Bageshwar, which was challenged in Writ Petition No. 1443 (S/S) of 2007. The said writ petition was disposed on 01.10.2007, directing respondent no. 3 to decide the representation dated 21.09.2007, made by the petitioner. It appears that in pursuance of said order the petitioner was diverted from Veterinary Hospital, Garur to Veterinary Hospital, Basot (Almora) and as such, in fact, he was transferred from Bhikiasen to Basot (Almora) as he has not joined his duties at Garur, District Bageshwar. 4) The impugned order dated 29.11.2007 shows that the petitioner is now again transferred from Basot (Almora) to Garur (Bageshwar). 5) Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that within a period of one month, the petitioner has been transferred from Basot (Almora) to Garur (Bageshwar) without any sufficient reason. The impugned order, copy of which is Annexure- 5 to the writ petition, shows that there were complaints against the petitioner at Basot and, consequently, he was transferred on the administrative ground. 6) Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that how could there be any complaint when the petitioner not even completed three days in his new place of posting i.e. at Basot. However, Annexure S.C.A.-1 to the short counter affidavit field on behalf of the respondents, shows that there were complaints from the public representatives against the petitioner that he indulges in political activities with his wife, who is Block Pramukh of Bhikiasen and as such he should be transferred out of the district. 7) Having gone through the contents of the writ petition, counter affidavit, short counter affidavit and the annexures filed therewith, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned transfer order. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. (Stay Vacation Application No. 612 of 2008 also stands dismissed). (Prafulla C.Pant, J.) Dt. March 26,2008 H . N e g i