WP(C) 1114/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. L.K. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. B.B. Basumatary, learned Standing counsel, APTDC. I have also heard Ms. R. Chokr aborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 02.08.2010 by which 12 office rs have been transferred to different places including the petitioner. the petit ioner has been transferred from Guwahati to Howli. The only ground on which the petitioner has assailed the said order is that in view of the accident which he had met with in the recent past, he is not in a position to move out of Guwahati . Mr. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wil l carry out the transfer order after a couple of months. Mr. Basumatary, learned Standing counsel APTDC as well as Ms. R. Chokrab orty, learned State counsel submit that the grievance of the petitioner was cons idered and disposed of by order dated 17.02.2011. They submit that since the pet itioner was transferred in exigency of service, he cannot assail the transfer or der on the aforesaid ground. I have perused the written instruction dated 28.03.2011 furnished to the learned State counsel by the Managing Director of the Corporation in which it h as been stated that all the officers have been transferred in public interest an d that they have joined in the new place of posting barring the petitioner. In t he writ petition no malafide and/or colourable exercise of power has been allege d. Having regard to the limited scope of interference in such matter exercising the writ jurisdiction and considering the ground on which the writ petition has bee n filed, I dispose of the writ petition without interfering the impugned transf er order. However, it will be open for the respondents to consider the request o f the petitioner to allow him to stay in Guwahati for a couple of months. No opi nion is expressed in this regard.