WP(C) 2567/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr. R.P. Sharmah, learned Counsel for the petitioner and M r. Chakraborty, learned Central Government Counsel. Having regard to the nature of the order proposed to be passed, it is inessential to go into factual details. Suffice it to mention that the petitioner who is presently poste d as Wing Commander in the Indian Air Force (hereafter referred to as IAF) and p osted at the Air Force Station, Chabua, Dibrugarh, Assam, has been by the impugn ed message dated 21/5/2009, posted on transfer at 406 AF Station which according to him is located in the State of Karnataka. Meanwhile, the petitioner, on 27/4 /2009, has submitted a representation before the concerned authority seeking pre mature separation from service on extreme compassionate ground. The said documen t (Annexure B to the writ petition) prima facie indicates that his immediate sup erior officers following an interview with him had strongly recommended for the acceptance of the said request. The issue, as is submitted at the Bar, is presen tly awaiting the consideration of the authorities at the Headquarters of the For ce. The impugned order of posting/transfer has been passed thereafter. It would be apparent from the said message that it is decided to be made effective on and from 29/6/2009. In other words, the petitioner is required thereby to join his place of posting by 29/6/2009. The petitioner being aggrieved by his posting/transfer has also submitted two representations dated 26/5/2009 and 22/6/2009 before the AOC, 14 W ing, AF, C/o 99 APO, which, according to him, are still pending consideration. Mr. Sharma has urged that in view of the background of the petit ioner’s inclination to retire from service voluntarily and the recommendation fo r the acceptance of his request by his immediate superior authority, the impugne d order of transfer, if implemented, would visit him with serious adverse conseq uences. Referring to the relevant guidelines bearing on the premature separation from service, the learned Counsel has sought to urge that in terms thereof as w ell, the impugned order of transfer ought not to have been passed. Mr. Chakraborty has contended that apart from the fact that the guidelines governing the issue of premature separation from service do not place any embargo on the transfer or posting of an officer whose request for voluntar y retirement from service is pending final consideration, having regard to the e xigency of service of the Force as well as the extremely constricted scope of in terference in the matter of transfer, judicial intervention in the matter would be unjustified. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on a consid eration of the materials on record, this Court while is inclined to sustain the resistance made on behalf of the respondents, is of the view that the petitioner ’s representations referred to hereinabove in the singular factual background ou ght to be taken note of and decided by the concerned authority before whom these are said to be pending. As referred to hereinabove, the fact that the petitione r has sought premature separation from service on compassionate ground and that this request has not been readily declined by his immediate superiors, cannot be totally overlooked. Though this may not have a decisive bearing on the necessit y or otherwise of the petitioner’s transfer as made, in the opinion of this Cour t, it casts an obligation on the concerned respondent authority to dispose of hi s representations. As it is not very clearly discernible from the materials on r ecord that either the said representations has in the mean time been disposed of or that a final decision on the petitioner’s request for premature separation f rom service rejecting the same has been taken in the meantime, this Court consid ers it expedient to close this petition with a direction to the respondent No. 2 , the Air Chief Marshal, Air Head Quarters, Vayu Bhavan, to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representations on merits as expeditiously as possible. The respondent No. 3, Air Officer Commanding, 14 Wing Air Force, C/o 99 APO, before whom it is stated that the representations are pending would immediately forwar d the same to the respondent No. 2 for disposal in terms of the order of this Co urt. If the representations are pending, as is urged by the petitioner, the same would be disposed of by the respondent No. 2 at the earliest and in no case lat er than 12/7/2009. In case the representations have already been disposed of as on date, the decision should be immediately communicated to the petitioner in wr iting. Having regard to the scheme of the order, it is provided that pending dis posal of the representations, status quo with regard to the petitioner’s place o f posting as on date shall be maintained till 12/7/2009. No costs.