WP(C) 933/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. B. Chokraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Das, learned Sr. Standing counsel, BTC assisted by Ms. M. Bordoloi, learn ed Standing counsel, BTC. The petitioner who is presently serving as BDO, Baska Development Block is aggrieved by Annexure- III order dated 09.02.2011 by which he was transferr ed from Baska to Gosaigaon Development Block, Kokrajhar involving inter district transfer. The petitioner has also brought on record the second impugned order d ated 15.02.2011 (Annexure-6) annexed to the additional affidavit by which he has been transferred from Baska Development Block to Dotma Development Block. While the first impugned order was issued by the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Ass am in the Panchayat & Rural Development Department, the second impugned order ha s been issued by the Joint Secretary, B.T.C., Kokrajhar. It is submitted that since the transfer of the petitioner is within BTC area, it is the BTC authority who his competent to transfer the petitioner. Mr. Chokraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the places to which the petitioner has been transferred by both the orders, i.e. Gosaigaon and Dotm a, the posts involved therein have already been filled up and thus, the said two impugned orders have become infructuous. He submits that in absence of any vaca ncy at Dotma the petitioner cannot join there. On the other hand, Mr. Das, learned Standing counsel, BTC submits that t he post at Dotma has been filled up in view of the fact that the stay order is o perating in the instant proceeding. According to him when the writ petition is d isposed of, the petitioner can be posted at Dotma irrespective of the temporary arrangement that has been made. The records produced by Mr. Das, learned Standing counsel, BTC have reve aled that the particular MCLA vide note dated 07.02.2011 addressed to the Under Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, BTC Kokrajhar desires tra nsfer of the petitioner on the ground of there being complains against him. The records have further revealed that the Project Director, DRDO, Baska by his lett er dated 13.02.2011 addressed to the Joint Secretary, BTC apprised the purpose o f the petitioner as BDO, Baska. In the said letter certain comments/remarks have been made in the style and functioning of the petitioner which is not conduciv e for work culture. The transfer being an incident of service and the writ court having limi ted scope of interference in such matters and also considering the plea of the p etitioner that both the posts have already been filled up, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to make appropriate representation to the authorities agitating his grievance in respect of the impugned orders. In the event of making such a representation, the authorities in the State Govt. a nd the BTC shall dispose of the same in accordance with law taking into account all the relevant considerations. At this stage, learned counsel for the petition er submits that the petitioner will make the representation within one week from today. If such representation is made, the said two authorities may dispose of the same within 15 days thereafter. Interim order passed earlier stands merged w ith this final order.