Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Temple which is having an executive officer in the rank of Deputy Commissioner. Arulmigu Ramanathaswamy Temple is also having an Executive Officer of the same rank ie., the Deputy Commissioner. There is no infraction of the mandate set out in Rule 17(4). The primary ground on which the interim order was granted does not really hold good. The respondents have made available the relevant records which indicate as to why the transfer order was made on administrative grounds. It can be seen therefrom that when an inspection was conducted on 02.08.2022 and 03.08.2022, the writ petitioner was not present. The attendance register has been produced before me. I do not find the initial of the writ petitioner on the said two dates. In fact, a memo has also been issued to the writ petitioner calling upon him to explain in this regard. In my view, this is certainly an appropriate ground for effecting transfer. This can legitimately be considered as administrative ground. Of-course, I will have to deal with the contention as to whether the impugned order is vitiated by malice. The petitioner has not impleaded any authority in person. Therefore, it is not possible for this Court to consider the said contention. Of-course, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order is vitiated by malice in law. I am not able to accept the said submission. The contention advanced by the petitioner's counsel essentially amounts to allegation of malafide. The
