( 1 ) THE present revision petition has been placed before the Division Bench pursuant to an order of reference made by the learned Single Judge doubting the correctness of the law laid down in the case of Shivaji Education Society Karwar, Uttara Kannada District v Commissioner of Public instructions, Bangalore and Others, wherein, Saldanha, J. , has held that.-" on a careful consideration of the submissions canvassed on behalf of the three contesting parties, the various provisions of the Grant-in-Aid Code, the Zilla Parishad Act and other relevant provisions as also the law on the point that has been very lucidly illustrated in the aforesaid decisions, the position that emerges is that after the promulgation of the Zilla Parishad act, that there can be no dispute about the fact that the overall jurisdiction and control in respect of even the private aided institutions does vest with the Zilla Parishad. Under these circumstances, the departmental authorities were fully justified in issuing the Circular dated 15-9-1990 pointing out that even in respect of transfers from one institution to the other, that it is necessary to obtain the approval of the Zilla Parishad". ( 2 ) THE present revision is directed against the order dated 24-7-1995 passed by the Educational appellate Tribunal. The petitioner had approached the Tribunal under Section 8 of the Karnataka private Educational Institutions (Discipline and Control) Act, 1975, for setting aside the order dated 31-5-1991 by which the petitioner, who was working as an Assistant Teacher in Sarvodaya vidyalaya, Khanapur, was transferred to another institution viz. , St. Mary's Composite High school, Hubli, in Dharwad District, both falling under the same management namely, the belgaum Diocese Board of Education (respondent 1 ). The Tribunal, on consideration of the materials placed before it and the taw laid down by this Court and the Supreme Court, had rejected the appeal by the impugned order, by holding that the impugned order of transfer was neither punitive nor vindictive or mala fide and the management had a right to transfer its employee from one establishment to another keeping in view the administrative exigencies. In para 4 of the order of reference it has been noticed by the learned Single Judge that though he was satisfied that on merits the order of transfer does not require any interference but since reliance has been placed on the decision of this Court in the case of Shivaji Education Society, supra, by contending that transfer in question had been effected without sanction of the Zilla parishad and is thus invalid, therefore, the matter required to be referred to the Division Bench. The only question required to be considered by us is as to whether any prior sanction of the Zilla parishad is required for effecting transfer of a teacher/employee of an aided institution from one school to another, situated within the same District or even outside the District. ( 3 ) THE resolution by which the petitioner was sought to be transferred was passed on 13-5-1991. At the material time, the aided institutions were regulated by the "grant-in-Aid Code for secondary Schools" framed by the State Government under Article 162 of the Constitution of india. Rule 59 of the said Code has provided for transfer of teachers from one aided institution to another aided institution. This rule reads as under.- " transfer of teachers from one aided institution to another aided institution.--When teachers already in employment in one aided institution are transferred to some other aided institution under the same management, their previous service may be taken into consideration and their salary that was admitted for grant in the previous institution may also be given to the teachers. When teachers of one aided institution are transferred to another aided institution under different managements, in the State or outside, their previous service may be taken into consideration and the salary admitted in the previous institutions may also be given provided, previous permission of the Director is obtained. The Director shall give such permission after examining the certificate, as regards the service and the salary paid in the previous institutions issued by the inspecting Officers of the District or Division concerned. (i) If a teacher is transferred from one school to another under the same management, his service and pay are protected. (ii) If a teacher is transferred from one school to another school under different managements with the concurrence of both the managements and prior approval of the concerned Departmental officer, his pay is protected. (i) If a teacher is transferred from one school to another under the same management, his service and pay are protected. (ii) If a teacher is transferred from one school to another school under different managements with the concurrence of both the managements and prior approval of the concerned Departmental officer, his pay is protected. Such transferred teacher will have to take the last place in the cadre for purpose of his seniority in the new school. However, his continuous service is protected for other service benefits like pension and service gratuity". ( 4 ) THE above rule does not postulate for taking any prior sanction from any authority much less the Chief Secretary of the concerned Zilla Parishad for transfer of a teacher from one aided institution to another aided institution under the same management. It is now well-settled, as could be seen from the Privy Council decision in Alexandre Bouzourou v The Ottoman Bank, that postings within the same establishment is inherently transferable unless a contrary is shown with reference to the contract of service. It is also well-established that the transfer of an employee from one place of working to another is merely an incident of service. ( 5 ) THEREFORE, keeping in view the above law, the respondent-management was well within its competence to effect transfer of the petitioner from one of its educational institutions to another, though situated in another District. Notwithstanding the said facts and related law on the subject, the present controversy had cropped up because of a Circular dated 15-1-1990 issued by the commissioner, Department of Public Instructions. The relevant extract of the Circular (as translated in English) reads as under.- " circular sub.-- Guidelines for the transfer of the staff of the Private/aided High Schools --Regarding. With reference to the above subject, the following guidelines are prescribed.-(1) Before transferring the staff of the Private/aided Schools, willingness letters have to be obtained regarding the transfer from the concerned staff. (2) Before transferring previous approval should be obtained from the concerned authority by contacting the concerned District Deputy Director of the Department of Public Instructions. Transfer of the Staff Concerned Authority ( Transfer of the staff in the same To obtain the orders of the Chief 1 District of the aided High School Secretary of the concerned Zilla )of the same Board of Parishad. Management. Transfer of the Staff Concerned Authority ( Transfer of the staff in the same To obtain the orders of the Chief 1 District of the aided High School Secretary of the concerned Zilla )of the same Board of Parishad. Management. ( Regarding the transfer of staff of 2 the unaided High School which )will come under aided scheme in future of the same Board of management. ( Transfer of the staff of the 3 inter-district aided High Schools ) of the same Board of management.-do- permission to be obtained from director (High School education) Office of the commissioner, Department of public Instructions, Bangalore". ( 6 ) THE above Circular was subsequently amended by another Circular by the Director of Public instructions dated 19-4-1990 which reads as under.- " amendment sub.-- Guideline regarding the transfers of Private: Aided High School Staff. Ref.-- 1. This Office Circular No. C8 (4) Sha. Sh. A. Varga-9:89-90, dated 17-1-1990. 2. Representation of the Secretary, Catholic Board of Education, Mangalore No. CBE: C9: 110-90, dated 8-3-1990. As stated in guideline in Serial No. 1 of this Office Circular No. C8 (4) Sha. Sh. A. Varga-9:89-90, dated 15 : 17-1-1990 that "consent letter should be obtained from the private aided High School staff concerned before transferring them and it is stated that this guideline should be applied only in the following two cases.- (1) In cases of transfers between two different Boards of Management in one district as well as between inter-district aided High School Staff, consent letter should be obtained from the concerned staff. (2) In cases of transfers of staff, in one board of Management commenced in different years, which are in unaided period, and in future High Schools which will subject to the grant of aided high Schools in different years consent letter should be obtained from the staff. In the above-mentioned two cases only consent letter should be obtained from the concerned staff regarding the transfers. In the remaining cases it is clarified that Serial No. 1 mentioned in the Circular even No. of this office referred in reference-1, does not apply". ( 7 ) KEEPING in view that it is a matter in regard to the third condition incorporated in the Circular dated 15-1-1990, prior permission of the Director (Higher Secondary) was obtained by the respondent-Management under his order dated 16-5-1991. ( 7 ) KEEPING in view that it is a matter in regard to the third condition incorporated in the Circular dated 15-1-1990, prior permission of the Director (Higher Secondary) was obtained by the respondent-Management under his order dated 16-5-1991. But, subsequently, the respondent-Director by his order dated 26-6-1991 withdrew the said permission. This latter order of the Director was challenged by the respondent-Management by filing Writ Petition No. 27040 of 1991 which was allowed by this Court by Order dated 13-10-1993 and the Director's order withdrawing the permission was quashed. Notwithstanding the aforesaid facts, a contention was raised on behalf of the petitioner before the learned Single Judge, that the order of transfer was bad because the same was issued without seeking prior permission of the Chief Secretary of the concerned Zilla Parishad. In support of this contention, reliance was, placed on the judgment of the learned Single Judge in case of Shivaji Education Society, supra. ( 8 ) LEARNED Single Judge in the case of Shivaji Education Society, supra, has founded his conclusion on the basis of the circular dated 15-1-1990 issued by the Director of Public instructions and the provisions contained in Clause XI of Section 182 read with Section 184 of the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal Panchayats and Nyaya panchayats Act, 1983 (for short, the 'panehayat Act' ). Section 182 of the Panchayat Act delineates the functions of the Zilla Parishad. Clause XI thereof reads as under.- " x. Education and Social Education.- (a) Implementation with the collaboration of Mandal Panchayat Schemes of adult literacy undertaken by other bodies. (b) xxx xxx xxx (c) Assisting, encouraging and guiding of educational activities in the District including the establishment and maintenance of primary and secondary schools in the district". ( 9 ) A bare reading of the above provision clearly shows that it spells out the functions which are required to be discharged by the Zilla Parishad. But, the provision nowhere provides that the zilla Parishad or its Executive Officer can interfere with the administration of Private Aided institutions. The provision merely entrusts a duty on the Zilla Parishad to establish and maintain primary and secondary schools in the District which has to be necessarily done by it out of its own endeavours and funds. But, the provision nowhere provides that the zilla Parishad or its Executive Officer can interfere with the administration of Private Aided institutions. The provision merely entrusts a duty on the Zilla Parishad to establish and maintain primary and secondary schools in the District which has to be necessarily done by it out of its own endeavours and funds. ( 10 ) SO far as Section 184 is concerned, it empowers the State Government to entrust such powers and functions relating to any matter as are exercised and confirmed by the Government or any officer of the Government under any enactment, which the State Legislature is competent to enact or otherwise in the executive powers of the State. But, this section itself provides that such entrustment can be done only by an order which is published in the Official Gazette. Moreover, the entrustment has to be done only by the State Government itself. In the present case, even if by the Circular dated 15-1-1990 an entrustment of power was sought to be made in favour of the concerned Zilla Parishad, the same is ultra vires for the simple reason that, it has not been made by the State Government but, by one of its servants namely, Commissioner, Department of public Instructions and more fatal ground is that, it has been sought to be done without its publication in the Official Gazette. Therefore, in the eye of law, there was no entrustment whatsoever in favour of the Zilla Parishad. As such, the Circular dated 15-1-1990 is of no legal consequence. ( 11 ) FOR the aforesaid reasons, we are constrained to bold that in the case of Shivaji Education society, supra, the learned Single Judge has not laid down the correct law. We hold that, even at the material time no prior permission was required to be obtained from the Chief Secretary of the zilla Parishad for effecting the transfer of an employee from one aided institution to another aided institution under the same management. ( 12 ) FOR the aforesaid reasons in our opinion, no interference is called for with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. ( 13 ) THE revision petition is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.