IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 13775 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : 04.09.2009 Beant Singh Paul ... PETITIONER Versus State of Punjab and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. The petitioner, who is working as Superintending Engineer in the Punjab Water Resources Management and Development Corporation Limited, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as `the respondent Corporation'), has filed the instant petition challenging the order of his transfer from Hoshiarpur to Chandigarh, being illegal, arbitrary and violative of the transfer policy of the respondent Corporation, copy of which has been annexed with the petition as Annexure P-3. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is going to retire on 31.3.2010 and the transfer policy of the respondent Corporation provides that if an employee is to retire within next two years, then he may be allowed to continue in the same District or at the same station of posting CWP No. 13775 of 2009 -2- till retirement, so far as possible. Counsel further submits that an employee cannot be transferred before three years stay on the post. He states that the petitioner in this case was transferred from Chandigarh to Hoshiarpur only on 27.2.2009, therefore, his re-transfer from Hoshiarpur to Chandigarh is illegal. After hearing counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order of transfer in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Earlier, vide transfer order dated 27.2.2009, the petitioner was transferred from Chandigarh to Hoshiarpur vice respondent No.3. The said transfer was mid-term and contrary to the transfer policy, but at that time, the petitioner did not raise any grouse. Now, if he has been transferred from Hoshiarpur to Chandigarh, he is challenging the same on the ground that it is contrary to the transfer policy. In my opinion, in the matter of transfer, this Court should not interfere, except in case the transfer is malafide. The transfer policy is only the guidelines, and the Government, in the public interest and in the interest of administration, can transfer an employee at any point of time at any place. In the instant petition, no malafide has been alleged. Thus, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned transfer order. Dismissed. September 04, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE