IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 3017 of 2010. Decided on: 7th September, 2010. Sunil Dutt Chandla. …Petitioner. Versus H.P.SEB. … Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh,, Judge. For the Petitioner : Mr. Javed Khan, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Anjula Khajuria, Advocate. Ms. Salochana Kaundal, Advocate as Conciliator. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The parties are present before this Court today. This Court has been making earnest efforts to take the family, which was otherwise in doldrums to the shore. In the process, on 3rd September, 2010, the petitioner who was present before us submitted that he would go with his wife and son. The wife and son who are present before us submit that the petitioner had not gone with them on that date. The petitioner has given the explanation that he had some other work. That he had some other work was not his submission when he was present before us. On earlier occasion also, we find from the proceedings, that the petitioner had not complied with the commitment given before the Court. It is fairly clear that the petitioner is not prepared to mend his ways as far as his relationship with the family is concerned. Therefore, this Court is no more interested in pursuing the matter in that regard. It is for the petitioner to choose his fate. 2 2. The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Annexure P-2, order of transfer. As per the said order, he was transferred from Ani to Mandi. According to the petitioner, he was transferred to Ani only in July, 2009 and within one year he is again disturbed from that place. In the reply furnished by the Board, it is stated that the transfer was made on administrative ground, also in the public interest and on the basis of a complaint lodged by his lawful wife. The petitioner belongs to Mandi. His parents are also at Mandi. Therefore, apparently, the transfer is made only to help the petitioner to be near to his family. We find that there is no allegation of any mala fide in the transfer. The transfer being made only in the better interest of the petitioner, we do not find any ground to interfere with the same. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 7th September, 2010 ( Justice Kuldip Singh), (tr) Judge. 3