THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 11919 OF 2008 O R D E R: The petitioner was appointed on contractual basis, as a Resident Teacher, in the year 1997. In the recent past, her services were regularized, vide proceedings, dated 10.10.2007. The initial appointment of the petitioner was in a place in Zone-II. In between, she came to be transferred to different places and at present, she is working in the 2nd respondent Institution, in West Godavari District. The petitioner states that her husband is also working in West Godavari District, and it was only in the recent past, she was transferred to that place. It is urged that the transfer to Dakkili in Zone- III is untenable in law, inasmuch as the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organization of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 (for short ‘the Presidential Order’) does not apply to the services in the 1st respondent Institution. Certain other grounds are also urged. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The petitioner was continuing as a contractual employee, till 10.10.2007. In pursuance of the orders issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.59 Social Welfare (RS-I) Department, dated 10.08.2007, the contractual employees in the 1st respondent Institution were regularized, subject to certain conditions. There was a categorical mention that the Presidential Order shall be implemented, while regularizing the services of contractual employees. It was in that context that the petitioner came to be regularized as a Resident Teacher in Zone-II. Since the regularization took place during the middle of the academic year, the petitioner was continued at the place, where she was working before the academic year 2008-2009 commenced. The 1st respondent has undertaken the transfer of employees all over the State, duly holding counseling for that purpose. Except pleading personal hardship, the petitioner is not able to point out any legal infirmity in the order of transfer. It hardly needs any mention that the transfer is an incidence of service and no employee had any vested right to insist that he or she must be continued or posted, at a particular place. At any rate, the petitioner cannot take any exception to her transfer to the Zone, in which her services have been regularized. This Court does not find any basis to interfere with the order of transfer. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 12th June 2008 PAN