CWP No. 14263 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 14263 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: August 26, 2010 Naresh Kumari .........PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and others ......RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA Present: Mr. S.K. Rattan, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). AJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL) 1. This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order Annexure P-1 dated 29.06.2010 vide which, the petitioner has been transferred from Hoshiarpur to Gurdaspur. 2. In State of U.P. Vs. Gobardhan Lal, AIR 2004 Supreme Court 2165, the following has been observed:- “It is too late in the day for any Government servant to contend that once appointed or posted in a particular place or position, he should continue in such place or position as long as he desires. Transfer of an employee is not only an incident inherent in the terms of appointment but also implicit as an essential condition of service in the absence of any specific indication to the contra in the law governing or conditions of service. CWP No. 14263 of 2010 2 Unless the order of transfer is shown tobe an outcome of a mala fide exercise of power of violative of any statutory provision (an Act or Rule) or passed by an authority not competent to do so, an order of transfer cannot lightly be interfered with as a matter of course of routine for any or every type of grievance sought to be made. Even administrative guidelines for regulating transfers or containing transfer policies at best may afford an opportunity to the officer or servant concerned to approach their higher authorities for redress but cannot have the consequence of depriving or denying the competent authority to transfer a particular officer/servant to any place in public interest and as is found necessitated by exigencies of service as long as the official status is not affected adversely and there is no infraction of any career prospects such as seniority, scale of pay and secured emoluments. This Court has often reiterated that the order of transfer made even in transgression of administrative guidelines cannot also be interfered with, as they do not confer any legally enforceable rights, unless, as noticed supra, shown to be vitiated by mala fides or is made in violation of any statutory provision. 3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is serving on a transferrable post. Official status of the petitioner has not been adversely affected. There has been no infraction of any career prospect of the petitioner by virtue of transfer. Under the circumstances, the petitioner has no legally enforceable CWP No. 14263 of 2010 3 right. 4. No ground for interference is made out. 5. Petition dismissed. 26.08.2010 (AJAI LAMBA) shivani JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?