Order Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by his transfer order as contained in Annexure-1, issued by Order of the Vice-Chancellor and under the signature of Director (Administration), Birsa Agricultural University, Kanke, Ranchi on 13.1.2010 whereby, the petitioner, who was posted as Artist-cum Photographer in Ranchi Veterinary College, has been transferred and posted as Artist-cum-Photographer at Zonal Research Station, Dari Sai in the District of West Singhbhum. 3. The main ground for attack of the Order of transfer is that the petitioner’s appointment was made only for Ranchi Veterinary College and, therefore, he cannot be transferred to any other place. The second ground is that in the impugned transfer order, it has been mentioned that the petitioner should not be given duty of Assistant/Clerk in future. This condition put in the transfer order is punitive in nature and, therefore, the order of transfer has been made by way of punishment. 4. The petitioner has annexed the Advertisement which was published in the year 2000 by the Birsa Agricultural University, Kanke, Ranchi for filling up several posts including the post of Artist-cum-photographer as Annexure-2 to the Supplementary Affidavit, dated, 8.4.2000. Pursuant to the said advertisement, the petitioner was issued letter of appointment vide Annexure-3 on 17.7.2004 appointing to the post of Artist-cum-Photographer and he was posted in Veterinary College, Ranchi. 5. From perusal of the Advertisement contained in Annexure-2 as well as appointment letter, it is clear that the service of the petitioner is under Birsa Agricultural University, Kanke, Ranchi and it is wrong to say that his appointment was only for Ranchi Veterinary College. After the appointment to the post of Artist-cum-Photographer, he was posted in Ranchi Veterinary College, Ranchi. 6. The impugned order of transfer cannot be said to be an order of punishment. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Artist-cum-Photographer and as such, even if it has been stated in the transfer order that he should not be given duty of Artist/Clerk in future, that does not effects his service condition. In fact, the petitioner could have raised an objection if the respondents would have asked him to perform the duties of a post for which he was not appointed. Therefore, such condition put in the impugned transfer order cannot in any manner be termed as punishment. 7. In fact, the petitioner could have raised an objection if the respondents would have asked him to perform the duties of a post for which he was not appointed. Therefore, such condition put in the impugned transfer order cannot in any manner be termed as punishment. 7. It is a settled law that the order of transfer should not be normally interfered with by the Courts except; (i) when the transfer order is shown to be vitiated by mala fide; (ii) 'when there is any fault of any statutory provisions; (iii) having been passed by an authority not competent to pass such order. 8. The allegations of mala fide must be based on concrete materials and must inspire confidence of the Court. Reference in this regard may be made to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. & Ors. vs. Gobardhan Lal and Another analogous case reported in (2004)11 SCC 402 . In the present case, no case of mala fide has been made out by the petitioner 9. Transfer is a condition of service and even Clause No. 11.1 (iii) of Chapter 11 of the Statute of Birsa Agricultural University empowers the Vice-Chancellor to create and fill up certain posts and to transfer the employees. It says that the Vice-Chancellor has the power to transfer the employees from one post to another in the interest of University without affecting their emoluments, status and service condition. It is not the case of the petitioner that due to the impugned order of transfer, either his emoluments or status or his service condition has been changed. The Vice-Chancellor of the University is fully empowered to transfer any employee under the University from one place to other place within his jurisdiction and therefore, the transfer of the petitioner from Ranchi Veterinary College to Dari Sai, West Sighbhum, which is a Research Station under Birsa Agricultural University does not suffer from any infirmity. 10. I do not find that the order of transfer has been made in violation of any statutory provisions. On the contrary, the order of transfer has been passed by the order of the Vice-Chancellor who is quite competent to pass such an order. 11. In this view of the matter, for the reasons stated hereinabove, no case for any interference with the impugned order of transfer is made out. On the contrary, the order of transfer has been passed by the order of the Vice-Chancellor who is quite competent to pass such an order. 11. In this view of the matter, for the reasons stated hereinabove, no case for any interference with the impugned order of transfer is made out. Accordingly, having found no merits, this writ petition is dismissed.