Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.— This is a peculiar case where the petitioner, who was appointed as Shiksha Mitra in Arjunpur was sought to be transferred to Alipur on account of the alleged threat of the new Gram Pradhan. Sri Siddharth Khare contends that this transfer order was passed by the competent authority and on a resolution of the Gram Shiksha Samiti where after the petitioner joined at Alipur and stayed there for the relevant period. The said transfer order was rescinded and the petitioner has been repatriated to his original post of Shiksha Mitra at Arjunpur but the present Gram Pradhan is not permitting the petitioner to function and allow the release of his Honorarium. Not only this when the petitioner represented the same, the services of the petitioner as Shiksha Mitra at Arjunpur have been dispensed with the approval of District Magistrate on the ground that the petitioner has absconded and absented from duty. It is this order, which has been assailed before this Court on the ground that the petitioner has not absented from duty and has rather performed his duty at Alipur in the circumstances indicated and with the permission of the authority. Sri Khare further submits that the petitioner's services cannot be dispensed with inasmuch as the Gram Shiksha Samiti of Arjunpur has also resolved to allow the petitioner to rejoin at Arjunpur. Having considered the aforesaid submissions, the relevant Government Orders pertaining to appointment of Shiksha Mitra do not make any provision of a Shiksha Mitra from being transferred from one village to another village. The post is not transferable inasmuch as a Shiksha Mitra has to be appointed, who belongs to the same village in accordance with the Government Order subject to certain further riders. There is no provision for transfer of a Shiksha Mitra after appointment. The petitioner himself sought transfer for his personal reasons. There is no evidence that the petitioner lodged any F.I.R. upon being threatened of his life. Even assuming for the sake of argument that the petitioner's transfer was occasional on account of the non-availability of a Teacher in some other School, the same does not appear to be in accordance with the relevant Rules. The repatriation of the petitioner, therefore, clearly indicates that the petitioner was absent from the institution at Arjunpur where he had been appointed. The repatriation of the petitioner, therefore, clearly indicates that the petitioner was absent from the institution at Arjunpur where he had been appointed. Apart from this, the representation, which has been filed and has been forwarded on 8.9.2012, copy whereof is Annexure-10 to the writ petition, also indicates an admission of absence by the petitioner. The petitioner himself has asked for joining of duty at Arjunpur after deducting the Honorarium for the period of absence. In the aforesaid circumstances keeping in view the aforesaid background where the petitioner has absented which is not permissible under Rules, it will not be appropriate for this Court to interfere with the impugned order even if there is some error in the order of the District Magistrate. The writ petition is dismissed. _____________