MEHTA, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Mr. Rathore appearing on behalf of the non-petitioner has produced before me the Gazzette notification dated 2nd August, 1986 and submitted that now necessary amendments have been made in the Act. He has also produced before me the copy of the telegram which reads as under: jktdh; lk/kkj.k rkj iz/kku] iapk;r lfefr] Jh ek/kksiqj ftyk lhdj Jh txnhk izlkn O;kl fodkl vf/kdkjh dk LFkkukUrj.k fopkjk/khu gSA vkidh jk; rkj }kjk pkSchl ?k.Vs esa HkstsA fodkl 3. Consultation must be an effective consultation and sending a telegram on 31.7.86 which is said to have been received on the office of Block Development in the evening of 31st itself and without giving a opportunity to express the view in the matter it cannot be said to be a effective consultation. Thus, sending of the telegram and asking a person to express opinion within few hours is nothing but misuse of power by the Govt. Now in the facts and circumstances the transfer order of the petitioner Vikas Adhikari Panchayat Samiti Shrimadhopur cannot be said to be good in the eye of law. The transfer order of Jagdish Prasad Vyas is set aside. However, it is observed that in the light of the amendments if the State Govt. wants to issue fresh transfer orders they will be at liberty to do so. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.