JUDGMENT 1. THE petitioner Dr. (Sm.) Pushpika Chatterjee is the holder of M. B. B. S. degree from the University of Calcutta with a Diploma in Anesthesia and she was declared a specialist in anesthesia in the year 1966. The petitioner's case is as follows : 2. THE petitioner joined the Medical Service, Government of West Bengal in the year 1962. She served at different places including muffasil areas within the State and at the material time she was the Resident Medical Officer-cum-Clinical Tutor, Department of Anesthesiology in the Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education Research, Calcutta. By order dated the 20th July, 1970 passed by the Governor (annexure A to the petition), the petitioner was appointed to act until further orders as Medical Officer (Anesthetist) Siliguri sub-Divisional Hospital, Darjeeling with effect from the date on which she would join the post vice Dr. M. N. Mukherjee also referred as Dr. Manindra Nath Mukherjee. There was another order following on the same date whereby the Governor was pleased to appoint Dr. Manindra Nath Mukherjee then employed as Medical Officer (Anesthetist) Siliguri Sub-Divisional Hospital Darjeeling to act until further orders as Medical Officer (Anesthetist) Sadar Hospital Suri Birbhum with effect from the date on which he would join the post vice Dr. A. Bose. 3. THE petitioner, in obedience to this order proceeded to Siliguri to join the post inspite of great hardship and even though it resulted in deprivation to her of all the facilities of study and research. When she went to join her post in the Siliguri Sub-Divisional Hospital she was not allowed to resume her duties and the charge was refused to be handed over to her by Dr. M. N. Mukherjee. She thereafter contacted respondent No. 5 Dr. A. K. Roy, Deputy Director of Health Services and as per his instruction she was allowed to join by putting in an application to the authority but without taking any charge from Dr. M. N. Mukherjee who had refused to hand over the charge. The petitioner made a representation because she was apprehensive of not getting her salary in view of her release from her former place of service. It appears that in the middle of October 1970 the respondent no. 5 visited the Siliguri Sub-Divisional Hospital and stayed there in the Inspection Bungalow where Dr. Mukherjee met him. In the last week of October 1970, Dr. It appears that in the middle of October 1970 the respondent no. 5 visited the Siliguri Sub-Divisional Hospital and stayed there in the Inspection Bungalow where Dr. Mukherjee met him. In the last week of October 1970, Dr. H. Saha Director of Health Services Government of West Bengal respondent No. 3 had been to Siliguri and while he was going round the Hospital the petitioner mentioned before him the matter of non-payment of salary, and non-handing over of the charge by Dr. M. N. Mukherjee. Dr. Saha thereupon told her that if the charge was not handed over to her by Dr. M. N. Mukherjee she would be transferred again elsewhere very soon. The petitioner stated to him about the unusual way of transferring her in violation of the rules and principles of posting and transfers of medical officers at which Dr. Saha seemed to be very much annoyed with her and asked her not to question the action of the Directorate. The petitioner became thus very much depressed at the attitude of the respondents Nos. 3 and 5 who seemed to be determined to act malafide and in a vindictive way against her. 4. THEREAFTER, the second order was passed, viz, the order of the Governor dated the 6th November 1970 by way of regularisation, whereby the petitioner was appointed to act until further orders as the Medical Officer (Anesthetist) Siliguri Sub-Divisional Hospital Darjeeling with effect from the date she would join her post and this order cancelled the previous order dated the 20th July 1970 regarding her transfer. On the same day there was a further order passed by the Governor whereby Dr. Manindra Nath Mukherjee then employed as Medical Officer at Siliguri was appointed to act until further orders as the Medical Officer (Anesthetist) Balurghat Sadar Hospital West Dinajpur with effect from the date he would join the post. This order also cancelled the previous order dated 20th July, 1970 regarding the transfer of Dr. Manindra Nath Mukherjee to Suri, Birbhum. This order is annexure D to the petition. Barely after about three weeks of the order dated November 6, 1970 another order dated the 27th November 1970 was passed by the Governor whereby the petitioner was directed to act until further orders as Medical Officer (Anaesthetist) Kurseong Sub Divisional Hospital with effect from the date she would join her post. This order is annexure D to the petition. Barely after about three weeks of the order dated November 6, 1970 another order dated the 27th November 1970 was passed by the Governor whereby the petitioner was directed to act until further orders as Medical Officer (Anaesthetist) Kurseong Sub Divisional Hospital with effect from the date she would join her post. This order dated the 27th November 1970 cancelled the earlier order dated the 6th November 1970 relating to the posting of Dr. M. N. Mukherjee (Anaesthetist)of Siliguri Sub-Divisional Hospital Darjeeling to the Balurghat Hospital West Dinajpur The petitioner thereafter made a representation to the Secretary, Directorate of Health Services stating that she was working in the present post for a period of 31/2 months only and such frequent transfers from one place to another affected her family tranquility and also the education of her child. She, accordingly, asked for cancellation of her transfer. It appears that by an order passed on the application made by the petitioner the order of transfer already passed was kept in abeyance till the 31st December 1970. Subsequently by a letter dated the 11th December 1970 the Director of Health Services informed the Chief Medical Officer that Dr. (Sm.) Pushpika chatterjee should be released to Kurseong S. D. Hospital by January 15, 1971 positively if under local arrangement-her substitute did not join in the meantime. A copy of this letter order was sent to the petitioner with instruction that she would be released from her duty on the forenoon of January 1, 1971. Subsequently the order of transfer was kept in abeyance till January 15, 1971. 5. THE petitioner in the meantime served her demand of justice on the authority on the 9th January, 1970 for recalling the order of transfer to Kurseong. As this requisition was not complied with the petitioner moved this court in Constitutional writ jurisdiction and obtained the Rule on January 14, 1371. It appears that an interim order restraining the respondents from giving effect to the impugned order till 8 weeks from the date of the order was also passed by the court and ultimately this interim order was not extended with the observation that if the petitioner succeeded in the Rule, the respondents would bring back the petitioner to her place of posting. 6. 6. AGAINST this order vacating the interim order the petitioner filed an appeal, namely F. M. A. T. 3151/71 and ultimately, the appeal was dismissed with direction for expeditious hearing of the Rule. An affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the respondents Nos. 1 and 2, the State Government and its Deputy Secretary of the Medical Department. All material allegations in the petition were denied and it was stated that the transfer of the petitioner was in the interest of public service. The petitioner by reason of the transfer would suffer no financial loss nor the conditions of her service would be affected adversely. It was also stated that the petitioner's husband Dr. K. K. Chatterjee, also in the State Medical Service made personal representation for retaining him at. Siliguri while the petitioner could be moved to Kurseong. Reliance was also placed on the affidavit of Dr. Saha in interlocutory proceedings as to the personal allegations against him as he was in leave preparatory to retirement. 7. THERE was another affidavit-in-opposition on behalf of respondent No. 5 in which he denied all allegations made against him personally. It was admitted that the petitioner was asked to join her post at Siliguri by making an application and without taking over charge when such charge was riot being handed over to her by Dr. M, N. Mukherjee immediately after her transfer to Siliguri in July 1970. The allegations that the order of transfer was malafide and vindictive or to feed his grudge were denied. An affidavit-in-reply was filed by the petitioner controverting all allegations in the said affidavits and she reiterated the allegations made by her in the petition. As to her husband's statement regarding her transfer to Siliguri she denied that, no such representation was made and further that she was not bound by it. It was stated that frequent orders of transfer made against the petitioner in order to accommodate Dr. M. N. Mukherjee would show that the transfer of the petitioner was passed malafide and as a vindictive measure. 8. MR. Amar Prasad Chakraborty, the learned Advocate for the petitioner has contended that the impugned order of transfer against the principles of postings and transfers of Medical Officers as contained in the Health. Department's Circular No. Estt/4993/im-186/67 of August 10, 1967. It is contended that the corresponding successive orders cancelling the orders of transfer of Dr. 8. MR. Amar Prasad Chakraborty, the learned Advocate for the petitioner has contended that the impugned order of transfer against the principles of postings and transfers of Medical Officers as contained in the Health. Department's Circular No. Estt/4993/im-186/67 of August 10, 1967. It is contended that the corresponding successive orders cancelling the orders of transfer of Dr. Mukherjee would show hat the instant transfer of the petitioner was made not for administrative purposes or in public interest but only for the purpose of accommodating Dr. Mukherjee at Siliguri and thus was malafide. Mr. A. P. Sarkar, learned Advocate appearing for the respondents has contended that under Rule 24 of the West Bengal Civil Service Rules a government servant may be transferred from one place to another and the circular referred to above has no statutory force. It is contended by him that the instant order was an administrative order and no writ would lie against such administrative order. It is further stated that in view of the facts of this case no reliance should be placed on the allegations made personally against some of the respondents and. there is no cogent evidence in support; of such allegations made by the petitioner. It is further stated that the order of transfer would result in no loss to the petitioner, financial or otherwise and there is no civil or evil consequences arising out of the order of transfer. In the circumstances it is submitted that the court has no jurisdiction to interfere and should not interfere with the impugned order of transfer. 9. IT is no doubt true that orders of transfer of Government servants like any other Government, administrative or executive order are passed invariably for administrative purposes or in public interest. such order normally are outside the purview of examination by courts of law. It is also the law, as observed by this Court in (1) Mihir Kumar Sarkar v. State of West Bengal 75 C. W. N. 831 (46), that an executive decision or action or an administrative decision is liable to be struck down if it is used malafide or for a collateral purpose. 10. IN this case on the face of the record there is something which impels me to hold that the order was not passed in the interest of public sendee or for administrative purposes. 10. IN this case on the face of the record there is something which impels me to hold that the order was not passed in the interest of public sendee or for administrative purposes. The first order of transfer of the petitioner is dated July 20, 1970 whereby the petitioner was asked to relieve Mr. M. N. Mukherjee at Siliguri who was transferred by an order of the same date to the Suri Hospital. Dr. Mukherjee did not hand over charge to the petitioner and the result was that there were two incumbents for the same office at Siliguri,at the cost of State Exchequer. When this fact was pointed out to the authority by the petitioner she was advised to file her joining report without taking over charge from Dr. Mukherjee, while it appears no steps were taken by the Government for taking charge from him. This state of affairs continued till November 6, 1970 when the petitioner by another similar order was again appointed to act as Medical Officer (Anaesthetist) Siliguri Sub-Divisional Hospital with effect from the date she would join the post. By this order the first order dated July 20, 1970 transferring the petitioner to Siliguri was cancelled. As is seen by two successive order of the same date, Dr. Mukherjee was transferred to Balurghat Sadar Hospital and his transfer to Suri was cancelled. It would also appear, though there is no express averment, Dr. Mukherjee continued to stay at the Siliguri Hospital even during this period till by another order dated the 27th November 1970 the petitioner was transferred to Kurseong Sub-Divisional Hospital. By this order again the posting of Dr. Mukherjee Medical Officer Siliguri Hospital to Balurghat Sadar Hospital was cancelled. 11. IT would appear as is obvious from the successive transfer orders of the petitioner that such orders were made only to enable Dr. Mukherjee to remain in the Siliguri Hospital. The order of transfer of this officer from Siliguri Hospital was cancelled thrice and there is no disclosure in the affidavit-in-opposition as to the reasons of such cancellation or that he was retained for administrative purpose or in public interest. It is too obvious that the petitioner was being transferred to Kurseong with the same object in view-that is for accommodating Dr. M. N. Mukherjee at the Siliguri Hospital for undisclosed reasons. 12. It is too obvious that the petitioner was being transferred to Kurseong with the same object in view-that is for accommodating Dr. M. N. Mukherjee at the Siliguri Hospital for undisclosed reasons. 12. CONSIDERING all this it appears to me that the order transferring the petitioner to Kurseong with which we are concerned here, was not for public interest as stated in the affidavit-in-opposition nor it. was for administrative purposes as has been submitted. It is patently for the purpose of retaining Dr. Mukherjee at the Siliguri Hospital. The order therefore is for collateral purpose and is malafide and cannot be sustained. I am of the opinion that this is a fit case where the order of transfer should be interfered with even though no civil or evil consequences would follow from such order. As against the personal allegations made by the petitioner against the officers of the Medical Directorate I think I should refrain from dealing with such allegations as it is not necessary to consider the same. I am also not relying on the circular enunciating the principles of postings and transfers of Medical Officer as it does not appear to have been issued by statutory authority and thus contain merely executive instructions. In the result the application succeeds and the Rule is made absolute. Let a Writ both in the nature of Mandamus be issued restraining the respondents from giving effect to the impugned order of transfer being annexure E to the petition in so far as it relates the petitioner. Let also a Writ in the nature of certiorari be issued quashing the impugned order annexure 'e' in so far as it relates the petitioner. Let the Writs be drawn up accordingly. There will be no order for costs.