311^1 ^il K;-tich t^i'ilh?i'q1^ 'iTm^ff ^T f^st <nti-^i< ~^^(! SV^f fliHicn ?"CTW(rf^T 3!K¥r '^f aifgq 31T*'?( SB : Hon'Ue Shrl Ittanlndra Malhan Shrlvastava, J. 7.9.2012 Shri T.K. Tiwari, counsel f^r tfae Shri Y.S. Thakur, Dy. Adv^cate Geaeral for the State, oa advaacc GOpy. Heard. The grievaace of the pet^tioney is that ttie pelitioner, despits having served iu scheduted are|a fi»ia 1981 tffl date, is agata beiog teansferred to scheduled area wjithout haviag taken aay optioa oftte petitloner as perpolicy containe^ in Circalar dated 20th October, 2005. Accordiag to leamed coi|m.sel for fhe pctttioner, it has bcea consistent poU.cy of the Govtj to transfer aa of&cer outside the scUeduled area after hc has serv^d for 5 years, by talang his option. The grounds, whlch have |ieen raised by fhe petitioner, requires consideration of his case by 1jhe Transferring Authorily/Conmuttee constituted by fhe State Govfc 1, however, find fhat t4e petltioner has aot preferred any representation to fhe Traasferrii^g Authorily ia fhat i«gard. Therefore, it is directe«|l (hat if the petitioner prefers a representation wifhia a period o^ 10 days Sxan toctoy, fhe saaie shall be considered and decided by fhe qompetent Authorily/Committee witlrin a period of3 wceks Scom. the dat^ of receipt of the rep?esentat»n. Por a period of 4 weeks, -dp coercave steps shdl be ts&en agaiast the petttioner. With the aforesaid obscrv^tions, fhe petttion is of. SAl-
