JUDGMENT 1. -The instant writ petition has been filed seeking relief to quash the impugned order Annx. 3 dated 22.10.2002 qua the petitioner. 2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner is working on the post of A.N.M. She was subjected to transfer vide order dated 2.3.2001 from Suratgarh to Rangmahal. On her request, vide order Annex.2 dated 24.7.2001, she had been transferred from Rangmahal to Suratgarh. Again, vide impugned order Annex.3 dated 21.10.2002, from Suratgarh to Anoopgarh during mid of the academic session of her children, ignoring her personal problems and over-looking the fact that she is going to attain the age of superannuation about one and half years. Hence this writ petition. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. A Division Bench of this Court. In Dr. (Smt.) Pushpa Mehta v. Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal & Ors., 2001(1) RLR 398 , has held that unless there are compelling reasons, ordinarily an employee should not be disturbed from the place of his posting when he is at the verge of retirement and he should be given sufficient time, which may be two years of so, to plan peacefully his post-retirement life. The Division Bench further held that any transfer contrary to this principle is mala fide exercise of power. 5. In the instant case, petitioner is at the verge of retirement. The other personal problems pointed out in the writ petition and the mid-term transfer also bring the equity in her favour. However, alternative remedy of appeal before the Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal is available to the petitioner, but in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Instead of relegating to the Tribunal, I consider it just and proper to decide the controversy in exercise of the powers Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned transfer order Annx. 3 is quashed on the ground that the petitioner is continuing at the place by virtue of the interim stay order passed by this Court. 6. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned transfer order Annx. 3 dated 21.10.200 is quashed. There shall be no order as to costs. 3 is quashed on the ground that the petitioner is continuing at the place by virtue of the interim stay order passed by this Court. 6. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned transfer order Annx. 3 dated 21.10.200 is quashed. There shall be no order as to costs. )2 However, it will be open for t respondents to transfer the petitioner if it is so required in the administer Live exigency of service or public interest.Writ Petition Allowed. *******