P.D.Dinakaran, J.: Aggrieved by the proceedings dated 21.7.2004 of the first respondent, by which the appellant, who was working as a cook in the Girls Higher Secondary School, Thuvarankurichi was transferred to the Panchayat Union Elementary School at Nattarpadtti, the appellant preferred a writ petition before this Courtt in W.P.No.745 of 2004. 2. The learned single Judge, by order dated 12.10.2004, which is impugned in this writ appeal, finding that the order of transfer dated 21.7.2004 was passed on administrative grounds dismissed the writ petition (W.P.No.745 of 2004). Hence, the appellant has preferred this writ appeal to set aside the order of the learned single Judge dated 12.10.2004 made in W.P.No.745 of 2004. 3. It is true law that unless there is a term to the contrary in the contract of service, a transfer order is a normal incidence of service. In the absence of any term prohibiting transfer of the employee, prima facie, the transfer order cannot be called into question. Further, it is to be considered that if the employee does not comply with the transfer order, it may ultimately lead to termination of service. Therefore, a declaration that the transfer order is illegal and void, in act amounts to imposing the employee on the employer inspite of the fact that the employee allegedly does not obey order of his/her superiors in the management of the employer and such a relief cannot be granted, vide Pearlite Liners (P) Limited v. Manorama Sirsi, (2004)3 S.C.C. 172 . 4. In the instant case, admittedly, the appellant has neither pleaded nor has there has been any effort to show that the impugned transfer order was in violation of any term of her employments. If that be so, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge dated 12.10.2004 made in W.P.No.745 of 2004 refusing to interfere with the order of transfer. In the result, this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, W.A.M.P.No.4 of 2004 is also dismissed.