ORDER S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. In both the cases, the petitioners have challenged the common Divisional Order No. 55/2005, dated 3rd June 2005, whereby and whereunder while they have been transferred to another place and it has been directed not to give them any sensitive positing. 2. Earlier when the cases were taken up affidavits having not been filed in time, this Court imposed costs of Rs. 500/- on the respondents in both the cases for payment in favour of Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority. However, in the order dated 3rd August 2005 in place of Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority it has been wrongly typed Jharkhand State Legal Services Committee. This has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the Railway. It is, accordingly ordered to read Authority in place of Committee in the 4th line of 1st paragraph of order dated 3rd August 2005. Counsel for the Railway prays for and is allowed another two weeks time to deposit the cost. 3. So far as the merit of the case is concerned, the grievance of the petitioners is that the order of transfer is penal in nature. The respondents in their counter affidavit have taken common plea that those, who have been posted in Dhanbad Division for more than 13 years, have been transferred. In view of such statement, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of transfer. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that similarly situated persons are continuing in Dhanbad Division for more than 15 to 25 years, many of them are also accused in criminal cases, but they have been allowed to continue in the Railway Protection Forces, Dhanbad Division. The following names have shown, who are continuing since long : (i) S.N. Pandey, Constable, Dhanbad Post. (ii) Jitendra Singh, Constable, Dhanbad Post. (iii) Jagarnath Ram, Constable, Bokaro. (iv) Sant Kumar Sinha, Constable, Gomoh. (v) Vijay Bahadur Singh, Constable Garhwa. (vi) S.K. Yadav, Constable, Gomoh. (vii) R.C. Tripathy, Constable, Gomoh. (viii) S.B. Singh, A.S.I., Garhwa. (ix) Sitaram Singh, A.S.I., Gomoh. (x) Ram Dhyan Mishra, A.S.I., Koderma. (xi) R.K. Yadav, Constable, Gomoh. (xii) Braj Deo Singh, Constable, Barkakana. (xiii) B.N. Tripathy, Havildar, Koderma. (xiv) S.P. Singh, Havildar, Koderma. (xv) Mateshwar Kumar, Constable, Banka. (xvi) Gopal Singh Yadav, Constable, Banka. (xvii) Dev Yadav, Havildar, Garhwa. 5. (vii) R.C. Tripathy, Constable, Gomoh. (viii) S.B. Singh, A.S.I., Garhwa. (ix) Sitaram Singh, A.S.I., Gomoh. (x) Ram Dhyan Mishra, A.S.I., Koderma. (xi) R.K. Yadav, Constable, Gomoh. (xii) Braj Deo Singh, Constable, Barkakana. (xiii) B.N. Tripathy, Havildar, Koderma. (xiv) S.P. Singh, Havildar, Koderma. (xv) Mateshwar Kumar, Constable, Banka. (xvi) Gopal Singh Yadav, Constable, Banka. (xvii) Dev Yadav, Havildar, Garhwa. 5. The petitioners have also cited names of following eight persons, who are posted in Dhanbad Division for more than 15 years. It is stated that the criminal cases are also pending against some of them; (i) Umashankar Singh (ii) S.N. Barik (iii) S.P. Singh (iv) Birendra Singh (v) Nunu Ravidas (vi) R.P. Singh (vii) R.D. Yadav (viii) G.S. Pandey, etc. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties while this Court has refused to interfere with the order of transfer dated 3rd June 2005, but taking into consideration the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, the case is remitted to the Deputy Inspector General-cum-Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, East Central Railway, Hajipur Zone, Hajipur to enquire into the allegation made by the petitioners that other similarly situated persons, who are posted in Dhanbad Division for more than 13 to 15 years are still continuing in the same Division and they have not been disturbed. On enquiry, if such allegation is found to be correct against one or other person(s), the authority will pass appropriate order within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 7. If any one or other person(s) has already been convicted of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code or for any major offence, as alleged by the petitioners, and if the order of conviction has not been stayed or set aside by any appellate Court, the authority will also decide whether any action in terms of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India to be taken against such convict or not. Both writ petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Mr. Pradip Modi, counsel for the Railway.