IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.234 of 2009 SERAJ ALI ANSARI son of late Azahar Ali Ansari resident of Mohalla Bagh Bhai Khan, P.S. Sasaram District Rohtas Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Raj Bhasha Department, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director (Urdu) Raj Bhasha Department, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Block Development Officer, Fatehpur Block, District Gaya. 5. Iqubal Ahmad Khan, Urdu Translator, Aurangabad Prakhand Aurangabad Sub-division, P.S. Aurangabad District Aurangabad. 6. Sirajuddin Urdu Translator, Barachatti Prakhand, Bodh Gaya Block, District Gaya. ----------- 3 01/04/2009 This appeal is directed against the order dated 22.1.2009 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 15795 of 2008 by which he has dismissed the writ application challenging letter no. 184 dated 17.9.2008 issued by the Director (Urdu) Raj Bhasha Department, Bihar, Patna by which the petitioner was transferred Fatehpur Block, Gaya to Imamganj Block Office in the district of Gaya. The case of the appellant is that in the light of letter no. 115 dated 28.5.2005 issued by the Director Urdu of Raj Bhasha Department, the Block Development Officer, Fatehpur, Gaya called for four options for posting of the appellant to which the appellant opted for Aurangabad Sub-division, Aurangabad Collectorate, Bhabhua Sub-division and Bodh Gaya Block. The grievance of the appellant is that he was not transferred to the place of his choice for which he had given option. He further submits that those who had completed more than three years at their previous place of posting are being permitted to continue leading to - 2 - non-availability of post as per the option of the appellant. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 5 in the writ petition, it is stated that such averments are not correct. The averment of the appellant that respondent no. 5 Iqubal Ahmad Khan is serving since about five years on the post of Urdu Translator in Aurangabad Sub-division and has not been transferred is incorrect. In this regard, it is stated that he was transferred from District Establishment section, Collectorate, Aurangabad to the Sub- divisional Office, Aurangabad itself on 14.1.2008 and so far respondent no. 6 Sirajuddin is concerned, he has not completed three years in the office in January, 2008. The learned Single Judge has found that the rules regarding transfer and posting create no right so as to find a legal cause of action rather they are only the guidelines. Only because the appellant has not been given the place of posting of his choice, no interference is required by this Court. We agree with the above observation. However, he may make a representation before the respondent concerned and if still there is vacancy at the place of his option, at the next general transfer his case may be considered for posting him at that place. With the above observation, this Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of. (J. B. Koshy, CJ.) (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.) AMIN - 3 -