THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.12243 of 2010 Date: 01-6-2010 Between Nathu Singh … Petitioner and Inspector General, Central Industrial Security Force, Southern Sector Head quarters, Chennai and 2 others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.12243 of 2010 Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Solicitor General for the respondents. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is a Head Constable in Central Industrial Security Force, presently working in HPCL-VR at Visakhapatnam. By Office Memorandum dated 14-5-2010 he is transferred to Bhopal. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the son of the petitioner, by name Master Vikram Singh is studying in II year B.Sc., at Visakhapatnam. If the transfer is effected at this stage, it will adversely affect the education of his son. Further, it is submitted that a representation dated 06-5-2010 is made to defer the transfer for one year. Same is recommended by respondent No.3 – The Deputy Commandant of Central Industrial Security Force, CISF Unit, HPCL- VR, Visakhapatnam. 3. The transfer is an incidence of service and merely because the son of the petitioner is studying at Visakhapatnam, this court in exercise of writ jurisdiction cannot interfere with the orders of transfer. However, from the proceedings of respondent No.3, it is clear that referring to the study of the son of the petitioner at Visakhapatnam, he has recommended the request of the petitioner for his retention at Visakhapatnam by one more year. It is submitted that based on the representation of the petitioner, which is recommended by respondent No.3, no further orders are passed. 4. In view of the pendency of the representation and taking into account the recommendation made by respondent No.3, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner based on the proceedings of respondent No.3 dated 08-5-2010 and take appropriate decision on the request of the petitioner for his retention at Visakhapatnam for one more year. Till such decision is taken by the competent authority, the petitioner is allowed to be continued at Visakhapatnam. 5. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________________ JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY 01st June, 2010. Note: Issue C.C. by today. (B/o) Ak THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.12243 of 2010 01st June, 2010.