IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 16666 of 2009 Date of Decision: 3.11.2009. Vijay Singh --Petitioner Versus Union of India and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. K.L. Dhingra, Advocate, who is present in the Court has been asked to accept notice on behalf of the respondents. The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 19.10.2009 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Sr. Divl. Security Commissioner/RPF, Northern Railway, Ferozepur, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Ludhiana to Lucknow. The petitioner is posted as a constable in Railway Protection Force at Ludhiana which falls within the Ferozepur Division of Indian Railways. His wife is also working as constable in the same force and is also posted in Ludhiana. Earlier, the petitioner was ordered to be posted to Quazigund-Baramula Section in the State of Jammu & Kashmir. However, the said order has been reconsidered and vide the impugned order petitioner has been posted to Lucknow. The grievance of the petitioner is that he and his wife both are serving in R.P.F and under the Govt. Policy issued from time to time the husband and wife should be kept at the same place. The petitioner has placed on record a copy of the Board letter dated 1.10.1971, wherein, it is stated that while transferring the CWP. No. 16666 of 2009 -2- employees from one station to another the fact that the employee's spouse is posted at a particular station may also be kept in view. Another condition of the policy is that the mid session transfers should be avoided. The aforesaid policy was reiterated vide another letter dated 6.1.1988. There is a specific averment in para 7 of the writ petition that the petitioner's two sons are studying in Class 5th and Class 4th in a school at Ludhiana and the mid session transfer will affect their academic career/schooling. It is also the case of the petitioner that the petitioner's wife also stands transferred to Ambala vide the same order. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. It is settled preposition that the transfer is an exigency of service and no person has a right to remain posted at a particular place or position. However, apart from the legal angle, there is human angle as well. Petitioner's two children are studying at Ludhiana. The transfer impugned is a mid session transfer. Not only that the petitioner has been transferred to Lucknow, his wife has also been transferred to Ambala, under such circumstances, there will be nobody to look after the children, who are minor and studying in Class 5th and Class 4th. In view of the above circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to implement the transfer order in the month of May, 2010 to enable the petitioner and his wife to look after their children till the completion of the academic session. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has also made a representation against his and his wife's transfer. CWP. No. 16666 of 2009 -3- The respondents may also consider the representation of the petitioner and if, it is possible, both husband and wife should be adjusted at the same place. Disposed of as such. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 3.11.2009 lucky