The petitioner was working as work charged LDC under the Loktak Development Authority at Kom Keirap. By an order dated 20.5.97 he has been transferred to the office of the Chairman, Babupara purely in the interest of public until further orders. Being aggrieved the present writ petition has been preferred. 2.1 have heard Mr. L. Nandakumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. A. Nilamani Singh, learned senior counsel for the respondents. 3. By now the law on the point of transfer is well settled by a catena of decisions of the Apex Court. A person holding a transferable post is liable to be transferred anywhere in the exigencies of service and who is to be transferred where is the matter to be considered by the administrative authority in the exigency of the service. Unless the order of transfer is passed with malafide or contrary to the statutory rules, Court does not interfere with the transfer order made in public interest. The only way open to the aggrieved party is to file a representation before the competent authority stating his difficulties. 4. In the instant case, no malafide exercise of power nor that the order of transfer has been passed contrary to statutory rules has been alleged. The only ' grievance of the petitioner as canvassed by Mr. L. Nandakumar Singh is that the petitioner has been appointed as General Secretary of the Association on 13.2.97. and by virtue of his office as General Secretary he is not liable to be transferred from his headquarters. In this connection Mr. L. Nandakumar Singh has referred to clause (iii) of Article 308 of the Civil Service Regulations which provides that Chief Executive of the Union and in his absence the General Secretary of the ' Union shall be brought on transfer to the headquarters or to any office under his control at the Headquarters. This Regulation is a guideline and Circular issued from time to time and does not have any statutory force. Violation of this regulations, if any, would not invalidated the transfer order passed in public interest in exercise of statutory power. 5. It has been held by the Apex Court in Union of India vs. SL Abbas, (1993) 4 SCC 357 that guidelines and circular does not confer upon Govt. employee a legally enforceable right. Violation of this regulations, if any, would not invalidated the transfer order passed in public interest in exercise of statutory power. 5. It has been held by the Apex Court in Union of India vs. SL Abbas, (1993) 4 SCC 357 that guidelines and circular does not confer upon Govt. employee a legally enforceable right. Executive Instructions are in the nature of guidelines and they do not have any statutory force. 6. For the reasons afore stated, there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is dismissed. 7. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. It is, however, open to the petitioner to file representation if so advised.