JUDGMENT : L. Mohapatra, J. - Petitioner who is working as Rural Development Officer in the United Bank of India has challenged the order dt. 5-8-2000 passed by Chief Manager of the Bank transferring the petitioner from Keonjhar to Konikapada in Annexure-3. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he joined as a Clerk in the United Bank of India on 20-5-1985 and was promoted as a Scale-I Officer at Belur ghat branch of West Bengal. After completion of four years of service in the said branch the petitioner was brought back to the State of Orissa and posted as Rural Development Officer at Tauntara Branch in the district of Jajpur in the year 1994. As per Clause 34(c) of the Guide lines issued by the Bank the petitioner represented for his posting at his home town in the district of Keonjhar in the year 1998. Though such a representation was filed, the opp. parties by order dated 21-9-1998 transferred and posted the petitioner to the Branch at Bolangir on the ground that no post was available in the district of Keonjhar. After working for about a period of two months only the petitioner was transferred to the district of Keonjhar as Rural Development Officer by order dt. 30-9-1999 and was relieved from the post on 24-12-1999. While the petitioner was continuing at Keonjhar only eight months after such posting, impugned order of transfer dt. 5-8-2000 was passed transferring the petitioner to Konikapada Branch as Deputy Manager. The said order of transfer is challenged on the ground that it is neither on administrative ground nor due to promotion and therefore, violates Clause 34(c) of the Guide lines issued by the Bank. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the said Guide line quoted in paragraph 3 of the writ application and submitted that an Officer who has undergone movement as per Inter-state or Inter-circle transfer will be considered for a preferential posting subject to availability of vacancy and administrative expediency. Such Officer may apply for transfer to his place of choice and as per the Guide line the prayer is to be considered. Mr. Das further submitted that the petitioner after completing four years of service outside the State had opted for a transfer to his home district and when the vacancy was available he was posted at Keonjhar. Such Officer may apply for transfer to his place of choice and as per the Guide line the prayer is to be considered. Mr. Das further submitted that the petitioner after completing four years of service outside the State had opted for a transfer to his home district and when the vacancy was available he was posted at Keonjhar. He further submitted that only after completion of eight months at Keonjhar he has been transferred to some other place for which there was neither any administrative exigency nor any justification. Another ground has also been taken in the writ application to the effect that the son of the petitioner is prosecuting his studies in an English medium school and the transfer during mid academic session would affect his studies. 3. Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of opp. party No. 2-Chief Regional Manager of the Bank wherein it is stated that considering the representation of the petitioner for a posting in his home district the petitioner was transferred and posted at Keonjhar when the vacancy was available. Since the petitioner is working in J. M. G, Scale-I and has become a very senior officer in that scale in Orissa circle he has to work as Deputy Manager with higher responsibilities and therefore was transferred from Keonjhar to Konikapada. There is no post of Deputy Manager at Keonjhar for adjustment of the petitioner which resulted in the order of transfer. Though it is admitted in the counter that appointment as Deputy Manager is not a promotion it is stated that the post of Deputy Manager carries higher responsibility and the petitioner being a senior officer has to take the responsibilities. It is also stated in the counter-affidavit that the guide-lines are subject to Regulation-47 of the United Bank of India Officers Service Regulations, 1979 which provides that every officer is liable for transfer to any place or branch of the Bank or to any place in India. Therefore, there being no mala fide in the transfer of the petitioner the same should not be interfered with by this Court. 4. From the averments made in the writ application as well as Annexures, it appears that after completion of four years of service in the State of West Bengal, the petitioner had represented for a posting in his home town Keonjhar in the year 1988. 4. From the averments made in the writ application as well as Annexures, it appears that after completion of four years of service in the State of West Bengal, the petitioner had represented for a posting in his home town Keonjhar in the year 1988. The petitioner's representation was not considered at that point of time as no post was available at Keonjhar and the petitioner was posted at a branch in the district of Bolangir by order dr. 21-9-98. The moment the post was available in Keonjhar two months after such posting at Bolangir Branch the petitioner was transferred to Keonjhar. There is no dispute about the fact that the petitioner was working in Scale-I is a Senior Officer who is supposed to take higher responsibilities. Since the post of Deputy Manager carries higher responsibility as stated in the counter affidavit and is not available at Keonjhar he has been transferred to Konikapada eight months after his posting at Keonjhar. Law with regard to the jurisdiction of this Court in the matter of transfer is well settled. Unless the order of transfer is mala fide or is in violation of any statutory rules this Court should decline to interfere in such orders of transfer. It is worthwhile to refer to the decision of the Apex Court reported in 1993 Labour and Industrial Cases 446 (Rajendra Roy v. Union of India and another). In the said decision the Apes Court in paragraph 7 held that unless an order of transfer is passed mala fide or in violation of the rules of service and guide lines without any justification, the Court and the Tribunal should not interfere with the order of transfer. In the present case there is no allegation of any mala fide and the only ground taken is violation of the guide lines. Appropriate reasons have been given in the counter-affidavit which has resulted in transfer of the petitioner and therefore, I have no reason to hold that the order of transfer was not justified. Another point to be taken note of is that the order of transfer has been passed in the month of August. In this regard I would only observe that as far as possible the opp. patties should consider transfer of its employees in the mid academic session only when it is absolutely necessary and such mid academic session transfers should be avoided. In this regard I would only observe that as far as possible the opp. patties should consider transfer of its employees in the mid academic session only when it is absolutely necessary and such mid academic session transfers should be avoided. In view of the reasons stated above, I do not find any merit in the writ application and the same is dismissed. 5. Writ application dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed