JUDGMENT SURINDER SINGH, J. 1. THE petitioner is a driver in the respondent-Corporation. Earlier in the year 2000, he was in the office of H.P.M.C., Parwanoo. In the month of March, 2011, he was transferred to the office of Food Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Processing Plant, Jarol, Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. (Annexure P-1) 2. VIDE impugned order dated 16.2.2013 (Annexure P-2), the petitioner has been ordered to be temporarily deployed in Food Processing Plant Parwanoo vice 4th respondent to operate the Refrigerated Van deputed with M/s Adani Group, whereas, 4th respondent from Parwanoo has been temporarily deployed in place of the petitioner to operate TATA-407 vehicle. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has been temporarily deployed at a place, which is more than 160 K.Ms. away from the present place of posting, sheerly on the manipulation of the 4th respondent and further that he has only 1 1/2 year service to superannuate. He has further submitted that if an employee has less than two years, then as per Transfer Policy, he should be given station of his choice or posting nearer to his home station. The impugned transfer order/ adjustment is alleged to be harsh owing to his old age problems. 3. THE respondent-Corporation in their reply submitted that the petitioner was imparted special training to drive Refrigerated Van in the year 2012. It is also submitted that bilateral agreement executed in the month of March, 2013 inter-se the respondent-Corporation and M/s Adani Group for carriage of apples in refrigerated vans from Mehndli, Rohru, Bithal areas to Chandigarh and Delhi for a period of eleven months. Thus for this purpose, two trained drivers were required to be deployed for execution of aforesaid agreement, as such, the petitioner and another trained driver were temporarily deputed for the purpose. It is also submitted that the petitioner was earlier posted at Parwanoo and was transferred to Jarol on his mutual request (Annexure R-1). His service details has also been given vide Annexure R-2. Thus, there being administrative exigencies and according to the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation, it is only a temporary deployment and the Transfer Policy is nothing to do with it. 4. WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record. His service details has also been given vide Annexure R-2. Thus, there being administrative exigencies and according to the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation, it is only a temporary deployment and the Transfer Policy is nothing to do with it. 4. WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record. It is very surprising that for two refrigerated vans, the respondent- Corporation has only two trained drivers and there is no back-up to meet any exigency. The respondent-Corporation has not given the details of another driver and his place of deployment. But however, in the aforesaid circumstances and exigencies of service, the petitioner is directed to join FPP Parwanoo within a week and this temporary deployment of the petitioner at Parwanoo shall operate only for a period upto 30th September, 2013, on which date, it shall come to an end. Thereafter the petitioner shall revert back to FPP Jarol at the place of his regular posting. In the meantime, the respondent-Corporation shall explore other possibility or have the alternative to train any other incumbent to take over at Parwanoo (FPP) as driver of refrigerated van, thereafter. 5. IN view of above, the interim stay granted to the petitioner is vacated and the petitioner shall join at FPP Parwanoo within a week from today, as stated above; failing which disciplinary action to follow. 6. WITH these directions, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.