Employees do not have a legal right to be transferred to a particular place. Transfer is a condition of service and is necessary in public interest and efficiency in public administration.

( 1 ) BY this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the writ petitioner (hereinafter referred to as petitioner) has prayed the Court for issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents Nos. 1 to 4 to give effect to the relevant rules contained in the circular No. PA (AS)/91/cm/127 dated November 21, 1988 transferring the petitioner to Raiganj branch of the Respondent No. 1 the United Bank of India in compliance with his application dated March 3, 1993 and to cancel, obliterate and annul the alleged order of mutual transfer of the Respondents Nos. 5 and 6 and transferring the Respondent No. 5 to Raiganj branch from Mathurapur branch, along with the other relief prayed for therein, for the reasons stated and on the grounds made out therein.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is a Special Assistant (Award Staff) of the United Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the said Bank) at its Branch at Birpara, District, Jalpaiguri since his transfer there on December 14, 1990. In view of the personal difficulties stated by him in his writ application, he had made an application before the authorities concerned on January 30, 1991 praying for his transfer either to the Raiganj Branch or Kaliaganj Branch or to old Malda Branch of the said Bank. He had thereafter filed another application dated February 3, 1992 for his transfer to any of the aforesaid three branches of the said Bank on terms of the option given by him. The validity period of the said option having expired he had again filed another application dated December 3, 1993 before the authorities concerned for his transfer to the Raiganj Branch or to the Chanchal Branch or to Kaliaganj Branch of the said Bank. But no heed was paid to his aforesaid representations by the respondent-authorities. It is contended by him that a vacancy having occurred at the Raiganj Branch of the said Bank he has acquired a right to be transferred there. But the respondent-authorities, acting arbitrarily, unreasonably and irrationally, had allowed mutual transfer between the Respondents Nos. 5 and 6 herein, by transferring Respondent No. 5, Special Assistant, from Mathurapur Branch to Raiganj Branch and Respondent No. 6 from Raiganj Branch to Mathurapur Branch of the said Bank by an order dated March 2, 1995, copy of which is annexed to the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner. The petitioner claims that. he should have been transferred to Raiganj Branch of the said Bank, as he has acquired a right to be transferred there for the reasons stated in the writ application.

( 3 ) THE writ application is opposed to by the respondents by filing an affidavit-in-opposition today, which he kept with the record. It is submitted on behalf of the respondent-authorities that the petitioner cannot claim, as a matter of right, to transfer to a particular post, and the writ application is not maintainable as, there has been no infringement of his, legal or constitutional right.

( 4 ) AS already indicated above, the writ petitioner appears to be aggrieved by the order of transfer dated March 2, 1995 of the Respondents Nos. 5 and 6, Special Assistants of the Bank, from Mathurapur to Raiganj Branch of the Bank and vice-versa. It is urged that he has the legal right to be transferred to Raiganj in the circumstances stated by him; and the aforesaid mutual order of transfer dated March 2, 1995 cannot be given effect to.

( 5 ) WHILE considering the question as to whether the petitioner has a legal right to be transferred to Raiganj Branch of the Bank, as claimed by him, it would be pertinent to recall the decision of the Supreme Court in Gujarat Electricity Board v. Atmaram, Sungomal Poshani, (1989-II-LLJ-470) wherein it has been observed that "no Government servant or employee of Public Undertaking has legal right for being posted at any particular place. Transfer from one place to another is generally a condition of service and the employee has no choice i