JUDGMENT Per Chief Justice: The appeal is taken up for hearing by treating it as included in the day's cause list. 2. The writ petition, of which the appeal arises, was directed against an order of transfer issued by the Assistant Inspector General of Police. By the impugned order of transfer the respondent (writ petitioner) was sought to be transferred from one district to another, but within the same range and the challenge was that the Deputy Inspector-General of Police and not the Assistant Inspector-General of Police was the authority competent to order such transfer. The Trial Court allowed the writ petition following the decision of a learned Single Judge rendered on July 17, 1989 in C. O. No. 8571 (W) of 1989 (Shyam Deo Singh v. State of West Bengal & ors. 3. In Shyam Deo Singh's case a similar question arose for consideration of the learned Single Judge. In view of Regulation 834 of the Police Regulations of Bengal, 1943, hereinafter .referred to as "the Regulations". which specifies the Deputy Inspector-General of Police as the authority competent to make transfer from one district to another within his range the learned Single Judge held that a similar order of transfer impugned in that case was passed without jurisdiction. Reliance was ought to be placed in that case upon Regulation 35 of the Regulations which, iater alia, authorises the Inspector General of Police to issue without reference to the provincial (State) Government standing or general orders either on matters of routine or to simplify or explain previous orders". The learned Single Judge, however, held that such an order, administrative or executive in nature, issued under Regulation 35, could not override Regulation 834. In other words, it was held that no standing or general order issued under Regulation 35 could substitute one specified authority for another in respect of passing of orders of transfer. 4. In our opinion, the view take in Shyam Deo Singh's case is unassailable. Regulation 834 finds place under sub-title "ll-Postings and Transfers" in Chapter 15 of the Regulations which, as per the title it bears, deals with "Leave, Postings and Transfers". It prescribes the authorities competent to make transfers. The said Regulation thus is a special provision specifying the authorities competent to transfer various categories of subordinate officers. Regulation 834 finds place under sub-title "ll-Postings and Transfers" in Chapter 15 of the Regulations which, as per the title it bears, deals with "Leave, Postings and Transfers". It prescribes the authorities competent to make transfers. The said Regulation thus is a special provision specifying the authorities competent to transfer various categories of subordinate officers. Regulation 33, on there other hand, occurs under sub-title "1-Powers and Duties" in Chapter 3 of the Regulations bearing the title "Direction and Control. It prescribes the power of the Inspector General of Police and authorises him to issue, without reference to the Provincial (State) Government, standing or general orders either on matters of routine or to simplify or explain previous orders. The said Regulation, therefore, is a general provision. It cannot be read as overriding 'Regulation 834 and as authorising the Inspector-General of Police to issue standing or general orders which run counter to or derogate from a special provision made elsewhere in the Regulations. Besides, the power to issue such orders is confined to matters of routine. The conferment of power to make transfer of officers is not a matter of routine. The very fact that a separate and special provision is made in the Regulations prescribing the authorities empowered to effect transfers is a clear indication in that direction. In any case, all such orders are required to have the subsequent approval of the Provincial (State) Government for the incorporation of any of them in the Police Regulations. There is nothing on the record to show that such subsequent approval for incorporation of a standing or general Order, if any, issued by the Inspector-General of Police, empowering the Assistant Inspector-General of Police to order the transfer of a subordinate officer from one district to another within his range, was taken. Be it stated that our attention has not been drawn to any such incorporated order in the Regulations. The Trial Court, therefore, rightly allowed the writ petit ion in the present case by following the said decision. 5. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal fails and is dismissed. 6. No separate order is required to be passed on the application for stay, which, too, stands disposed of in light of the foregoing order, it any stands vacated. Ruma Pal, J.-I agree. Appeal dismissed.