HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL. Writ Petition No. 559(S/S)06; Rajeev Singh S/o Sri Raghuveer Singh, R/o village Kurao,P.O. Kurao, District Badaun, Uttar Pradesh. ---- Petitioner Vs. 1. Senior Superintendent of Police, District Udham Singh Nagar, 2. Fire Service Station Officer, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar. ---- Respondents Sri M.C. Bansal, Adv. and Atul Kumar Bansal learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttaranchal. Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Bansal learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel who has accepted notices for the respondent s. The petitioner, who is Fireman in Fire Services, has challenged the order dated 23.03.2006 passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Udham Singh Nagar by which he has been transferred from fire Station Khatima to Fire Station Jaspur district U.S. Nagar. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has been transferred thrice within a period of ten moths and, as such, the impugned order falls under the category of frequent transfer. the petitioner was earlier transferred vide order dated 29.04.2005 from Ranikhet (Almora) to Udham Singh Nagar and in pursuance of this order the petitioner had joined on 02.07.2005 at Fire Station Udham Singh Nagar. Thereafter, the Senior Superintendent of Police, U.S. Nagar posted the petitioner at Fire Statrion Khatima. But by the impugned order, the petitioner has been transferred from Khatima to Jaspur, which indicates that the petitioner has not been transferred thrice as per his version. Certainly, the petitioner was transferred on 29.04.2005 and again by the order dated 23.07.2006 which is order impugned in this writ petition, the petitioner has been transferred from Fire Station Khatima to Fire Station, Jaspur where a new fire station has been opened. The petitioner has already made representation in this connection on 24.03.2006 before the S.S.P., Udham Singh Nagar raising all his grievances and the same is pending before the respondent no.1. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer that the respondent no. 1 may be directed to take decision on his representation dated 24.03.2006 at the earliest. The prayer is innocuous. Accordingly, I direct the respondent no. 1 to take decision on the representation of the petitioner dated 24.03.2006 at the earliest, by a speaking order, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the dated of production of a certified copy of this order. With this direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of. (M.M. Ghildiyal, J.) April 25, 2006: NCM: