AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Katju and Umeshwar Pandey, JJ.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This special appeal has been filed against the impugned Judgment of the learned single Judge. The appellant has filed this appeal on the ground that he and his wife are living in Ballia and his wife is also in service. The learned single Judge has noted that the petitioner was posted in Ballia for 30 years. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the petitioner is in Ballia only from 1992. Even if that is so, he is in Ballia for 11 years. Learned counsel has relied on a G.O. which directs that ordinarily husband and wife, if both in service, should be posted in the same place. It is well settled that violation of a G.O. is no ground for interference with a transfer order. The petitioner must show violation of a statutory rule or mala fides. Moreover, the G.O. only states that ordinarily husband and wife, if both in service, should be posted together. Thus, this is not meant to be a hard and fast rule.
The appeal, is dismissed.