COCP No. 1585 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No. 1585 of 2010 Date of Decision: 13.8.2010 Harjinder Singh .....Petitioner Versus C. Raul and another ….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri N.S. Dandiwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Hemant Gupta, J. (Oral) The petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court challenging his transfer vide order dated 25.3.2010. In the writ petition, the petitioner made a statement, after arguing for some time, that he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and dispose of his representation dated 29.3.2010 against the impugned transfer order. The grievance of the petitioner is that though two months' time has elapsed since the certified copy of the order was supplied to the respondents, but the representation has not been considered. It is well settled that the transfer is an incidence of service. The petitioner has no right to impugn his transfer for the reason that he has been transferred at a place, which is 100 COCP No. 1585 of 2010 [2] kilometres from his present place of posting. Since the transfer is a condition of service, therefore, mere direction to decide the representation, does not confer any enforceable legal right in favour of the petitioner. Consequently, I do not find that any case for initiation of the contempt proceedings is made out. Hence, the present petition is dismissed. [HEMANT GUPTA ] JUDGE 13.8.2010 ds