WP(C) 267/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. A.B. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Wise Im ran, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned S tanding Counsel, Social Welfare Department. I have also heard Mr. B. Buragohain, leanred counsel representing the respondent No.3 and Mr. D. Saikia, learned Sta nding counsel, Health, who was requested to obtain instruction relating to the p lea of the petitioner that she requires frequent medical attention. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner, who is a Child Developme nt Project Officer (CDPO), ICDS Project, Guwahati, has challenged the order date d 7.1.2011, by which she has been transferred to Tihu. By the said order, number of officers have been transferred and the petitioner is one of them. Two fold g rounds on which the petitioner has challenged the said order are as follows :- (i) The petitioner having not completed 3 years or more service at Guwahati, her case is not covered by the election guideline which requires transfer of an officer who has completed 3 years or more service in the station and who are li kely to be connected directly or indirectly to the election duties. (ii) The petitioner having suffered from serious ailments, her case is requir ed to be considered sympathetically. In the counter affidavit, the stand of the respondents is that the petitioner ha s been transferred in the exigency of service and that there being no malafide a nd / or colourable exercise of power, the impugned order is required to be susta ined. As regard her medical treatment, etc. it is the stand of the respondents t hat the case of the petitioner has been referred to the Medical Board. Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned Standing Counsel, Social Welfare has produced the re levant file in which the transfer and posting of the officers have been initiate d and passed. On perusal of the file, nothing is discernible that the petitioner has been subjected to any illegality. The file has revealed that a proposal was made at the appropriate level for transfer and posting of the Officers categori sing in two categories i.e. those who have completed 3 years of service and thos e against whom some allegations / complaints are there. It is on that basis, the file was moved. It was also pointed out that the Officers against whom allegati ons/complaints are there but have not completed 3 years, for them approval of th e Chief Minister of the State will have to be obtained. Thereafter the Departmen tal Minister approved the proposal and finally the transfer and posting was appr oved by the Chief Minister. Having regard to the aforesaid facts as has been disclosed in the file and also having regard to the limited scope of interference in such matters exercising po wers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it canno t be said that the impugned transfer order dated 7.1.2011, so far as the same re lates to the petitioner is vitiated by any malafide and / or colourable exercise of power. Consequently, the said order is not interfered with and the writ peti tion stands dismissed. As regards the plea of the petitioner that she requires medical attention, it is submitted by Mr. D. Saikia, learned Standing Counsel, Health that a medical boa rd has been constituted and the petitioner was asked to appear before the said m edical board on 21.3.2011. Subject to the results thereof, necessary follow up a ction in terms of the report that may be furnished by the medical board shall be taken by the authorities. The report was to be furnished to the Social Welfare Department. If such report is furnished, appropriate decision in the matter shal l be taken as expeditiously as possible.