IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17095 of 2008 KAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3. 13.01.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Learned counsel for the State today again seeks adjournment to take instruction. Time has already been granted for the purpose earlier. Transfer matters have their own urgency and the claims cannot be defeated by dilatory tactics on the part of the State. The petitioner was transferred on 22.6.2007 from Dalsingsarai to Jhanjharpur. His grievance is with regard to his subsequent transfer barely one year later on 30.6.2008. It is stated that he has already joined at Jhanjharpur and is working there. Transfer is an incident of service and the State policy for transfer normally visualize stability in transfer and postings for a period of three years. This cannot divest the State of its powers in exceptional circumstances on which there may be little occasion for the Court to interfere in the given facts of the case. In the present case, the State has failed to disclose any special facts. The transfer on that ground itself becomes arbitrary when it remains unexplained. The order of transfer does not spell out any reason but appears to be a part of an order of routine matter transfer. 2 The order dated 30.6.2008 is, accordingly, quashed. The writ application stands allowed. This shall, however, be without prejudice to the rights of the Respondents for transfer and postings to be exercised in accordance with law. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)