JUDGMENT R.A. Sharma, J. - Being aggrieved by an order of transfer, dated 30 June 1990, the petitioner, who claims to be District Health Education and Information Officer of the Uttar Pradesh Government, has filed this writ petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged transfer order on two grounds, viz.: (1) Mala fide and arbitrariness ; and (2) prohibition of transfer before completion of five years at one place. 3. Regarding the first submission learned counsel has invited our attention to Paras 7 to 10 of the writ petition. In those paragraphs it has been stated that the petitioner has been transferred at the behest of a local B.J.P. leader, Sri Harish Chandra Srivastava, who has by his letter, dated 20 September 1992, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure 4 to the writ petition, requested the Secretary, Ministry of Health, for transferring Sri U.B. Singh from Deoria to Jaunpur. Relying on the above letter a submission has been made that the impugned order transferring the petitioner from Jaunpur to Farrukhabad has been passed in order to transfer Sri U.B. Singh to Jaunpur. This submission cannot be accepted for three reasons, viz. : (1) The letter of Sri Harish Chandra Srivastava (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) is dated 20 September 1992, whereas the order of transfer of the petitioner is, dated 30 June 1992. It is thus apparent that the impugned order of transfer was passed about three months before the letter of Sri Harish Chandra Srivastava was written. (2) By the impugned order several persons have been transferred, which fact indicates that the said order was passed in the ordinary course ; and (3) Merely because a Member of Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council or Parliament recommends for transfer of a Government employee, the order of transfer cannot be declared illegal unless it is pleaded and proved that the recommendations were accepted and acted upon by the appropriate authority mechanically and the order of transfer was passed not on the ground of administrative exigencies. Although in Paras. Although in Paras. 7 to 10 of the writ petition the allegations have been made in the writ petition to the effect that at the instance of Sri Harish Chandra Srivastava petitioner was transferred from Jaunpur in order to accommodate Sri U.B. Singh, but, as mentioned hereinabove, the transfer order of the petitioner was passed about three months before the letter was written by Sri Harish Chandra Srivastava to the Secretary of Ministry concerned. This demonstrates fact that transfer order was passed not on account of any recommendation of Sri Harish Chandra Srivastava. 4. The second plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the Government order an employee cannot be transferred till he completes five years service at a place. No such Government order has been placed before us. That apart if there is any grievance to the effect that transfer order has been passed in violation of some policy of the Government the proper forum to raise the grievance against such order is the Government itself before which the person aggrieved should make representation. This Court cannot interfere with the transfer order unless a case is made out which has not because done in the instant case. 5. This writ petition lacks merits. It will be open to the petitioner to make representation containing all his grievances before the Government against the order of transfer. If, such representation is made before the appropriate authority it shall decide the same expeditiously as far as possible within six weeks from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before it. 6. With the above observations, the petition is dismissed.