1. This is not a case for interference. Orders of transfer made in exercise of administrative discretion should not ordinarily be interfered with under Art.226 of the Constitution. Guidelines for transfer are not statutory. They are meant for guidance in the matter of transfer. They are not exhaustive. In administration variety of situation not contemplated by the guidelines may arise which have to be taken into account. Merely because a guideline has been violated in the matter of transfer, that would not by itself be a sufficient ground for interference. The learned single judge has found that even according to the guidelines, one guideline supports the appellant whereas another guideline favours the 5th respondent. The learned single judge has pointed out that the files disclose that the distance between the residence of the appellant and Chengala Panchayat and Karadka Panchayat is the same. If that is so, there is really no great hardship which the appellant can complain about.

2. It was lastly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the observations made in Para.4 of the judgment preclude the Director from considering the request of the appellant for