1. By way of this petition, petitioner seeks issuance of a appropriate writ, direction or order quashing the impugned order dated 12.07.2019 (Annexure
P-3) qua-petitioner vide which the petitioner has been transferred form Incharge Faridkot Range, Division Ferozpur to Incharge Extension Range, Shri
Muktsar Sahib, Extension Division, Bathinda and for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No. 2 not to dislocate the
petitioner in violation of the rules, policy instruction dated 23.04.2018 (Annexure P-6) and transfer policy/instructions dated 29.05.2019 (Annexure P-
7).
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as respondents.
3. Transfer being matter of administrative exigencies, this Court generally interferes, if at all, very cautiously. Transfer is not a punishment but an
essential aspect of service, particularly, on a transferable post.
4. I am unable to persuade myself with the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No. 4 is not eligible to be appointed
as Incharge of the Range as per Appendix B Rule 6 of the Punjab Forest Subordinate (Group-C) Executive Service Rules, 2006.
5. For the sake of arguments even if it is assumed that the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is to be accepted, at best that will non-suit
the respondent No. 4 to be appointed as Incharge of a Range and would not necessarily mean that the competent authority cannot transfer the the
petitioner as the transfers are necessary consequence of Government service.
6. In my opinion, in the present case, the impugned transfer order dated 12.07.2019 (Annexure P-3) does not call for any interference from this Court
in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction vested under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
7. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the appointment of respondent No. 4, in case, he feels so and, if so advised, in accordance with
law.
8. Disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
9. Pending applications, if any, stands also disposed of.
