JUDGMENT :

Heard Shri A. Tatak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri S. Tapin, learned Senior Government Advocate, AP.

2. Considering the subject matter involved and the fact that necessary pleadings have been exchanged, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

3. The petitioner, who is a casual staff under the Office of the PWD has put to challenge two orders of transfer. The first order is dated 31.07.2023 whereby she has been transferred from Boleng Division to Yingkiong Division and by the subsequent order dated 16.08.2023, she has again been re-posted in the Tuting Sub-Division.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that apart from the fact that frequent transfers are not permissible in law, the impugned action is of the behest of the local MLA, who has also been made a party respondent in the present case. He submits that the entire action is triggered after filing of a writ petition being WP(C)/284/2023 by a group of persons which included the husband of the petitioner in connection with a Hydel Power Project and the contentions was that the local villagers were not consulted and the Project would adversely affect their