IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 720 (S/S) of 2003 Khajan Chandra Sah ……….. Petitioner Versus Inspector General, frontier Head- Quarters, S.S.B., Lucknow & two Ors. ………..Respondents ………………. Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the transfer orders dated 05.06.2003 & 09.06.2003, contained in Annexure Nos. 4 & 5 respectively to the writ pertition. The petitioner is serving under the Inspector General, Frontier Headquarters, Special Service Bureau (SSB), Lucknow. A new Sector Head Quarter (SHQ) was created in District- Bahriach (U.P.) where the posts were created and to be filled up. In SHQ Bahriaich, 04 posts of UDCs, 02 post of LDCs, 01 post of Steno and 02 posts of Accountants were lying vacant. In SHQ Ranikhet (Uttaranchal) against sanctioned strength of five post of Lower Division Clerks, nine persons were working. Therefore, a decision was taken by the respondents Nos. 1 & 2, vide order dated 05.06.2003, contained in Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition, to transfer four persons at SHQ Bahriach, who had longest period of service at Ranikhet except female employees. Accordingly, the employees including the petitioner have been transferred. Learned counsel for the petitioner assailed the order on the ground that if transfers were to be made amongst excess staff of SHQ Ranikhet, the junior most persons ought to have been sent because they were not working against the sanctioned strength. He further submitted that exclusion of female from the perview of the transfer is violative of Articles 14 & 15 of the Constitution of India as the order suffers from gender discrimination. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance in the case Air India versus Nergesh Meerza and others, reported in A.I.R. 1981, Supreme Court, page 1829. So far as first challenge is concerned, it is misconceived. All the nine persons were regularly selected candidates and the policy decision of the Government transferring the persons who have longest stay at Ranikhet do not suffer from any unreasonableness and arbitrariness. The second ground of challenge also has no force in view of Clause (3) of Article 15 of the Constitution of India, which gives special protection to the women for whom a special law can be made. Here in the same sprit the authorities were right in taking the decision that female employees will be left out while affecting the aforesaid transfer. In my opinion, none of these grounds are tenable. In view of above, the learned counsel for the petitioner made a request that the petitioner may be permitted to stay upto last of May 2004 as his marriage is to be solemnized and he shall proceed to join at Bahriach on 1st of June, 2004. Therefore, it is provided that the petitioner shall not be relieved from SHQ Ranikhet till 31st May, 2004. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of finally. 23.09.2003 P.Singh (P.C. Verma, J.)