"5...............Indeed a transfer is an incident of service and the discretion of an employer in transferring an employee is quite wide. Ordinarily no interference is to be made with an order of transfer unless it violates a statutory rule or is malafide. That however is not the whole, complete and ironclad statement of law on the subject. Policy and practice of the State Government are also to be reckoned for to evaluate an attack founded on arbitrariness against an order of transfer. In the instant case the transfer order dated 1-3-2019, vide which the respondent No. 3 was transferred and which has been quashed by the Tribunal, sought to displace the respondent No. 3 from RTO Alwar his place of posting a mere six months before his superannuation. That was in the cross hair of the inarticulated but yet principal premise of the order of this court in the case of Manjula Pathak (supra). In the case of Manjula Pathak (supra) this court vide ad-interim order dated 21-10-2016, noting that the petitioner had only one year to superannuate stayed the transfer order dated 9-10-2016. Subsequently, on the matter coming up before the court on 3-11-2017, the transfer order was quashed as the petitioner was to retire in the said month itself. The cumulative effect of the two orders aforesaid, entails an enunciation by the court that the transfer of an employee, within a year of his imminent superannuation, deserves
