THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.20354 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner joined in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), as Constable, in the year 1991. Thereafter, he was promoted as Head Constable. He was posted at the unit at BHEL, Ramachandrapuram, in the year 2009. The respondents issued orders on 07.07.2011, transferring him to a unit at Kudramukh, Karnataka State. The petitioner challenges the same. The petitioner states that assuming that he would be shifted to a different place, he made a representation, on 21.06.2011, and a reply was issued on 28.06.2011, stating that whenever transfers are effected, he would be kept informed. It is stated that the present order of transfer is contrary to the guidelines stipulated by the CISF, governing the transfers. He contends that his stay at Ramachandrapuram is hardly two years and he was shifted to a different place, before expiry of the usual term. The petitioner pleads that his children are studying and the transfer is affected in the middle of the year. The respondents filed a counter-affidavit. It is stated that the transfer of the petitioner to Kudramukh is on administrative grounds. It is contended that there is a Kendriya Vidyalaya at Kudramukh and the transfer does not bring about any hardship to the children of the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Solicitor General. It no doubt true that the ordinary term of a member of a Force, at a particular station, is 3 to 4 years and that the petitioner is transferred, before expiry of that term. The respondents have categorically stated that the transfer of the petitioner is on administrative grounds. It appears that some complaints were received as to the functioning of the petitioner and the respondents have chosen to shift him. The only alternative is to initiate disciplinary proceedings. As between those two options, transfer is a better from the point of view of the petitioner. Since there exists a Kendriya Vidyalaya at Kudhramukh, it cannot be said that there is any hardship for the children of the petitioner, in view of the transfer in the middle of the academic year. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:27.08.2011 GJ