JUDGMENT Per Deepak Gupta, J. 1. The petitioner by means of this petition has challenged the order dated 23.07.2012, whereby the earlier order dated 20.07.2012 whereby he was transferred from Nahan to Shillai, was cancelled. 2. The admitted facts are that the petitioner is working as helper in the H.P.State Civil Supplies Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) and served at various places from 1987 till 2012. He remained posted at Nahan for about two years and thereafter vide order dated 20.07.2012 he was transferred to Shillai. The allegation of the petitioner is that since his father is unwell he on 7.12.2011 had made a representation to the Managing Director of the Corporation to transfer him to Shillai and as per the petitioner his transfer was ordered because of this reason. The Corporation has not denied any of the facts stated by the petitioner in his petition and has virtually admitted all the facts. A very evasive reply has been given to some of the specific averments made by the petitioner but it is admitted that pursuant to the aforesaid transfer order the petitioner was actually relieved on 21.7.2012 from Nahan. It is also admitted that the petitioner sent his joining report on the same date itself from Shillai. 3. The main ground raised by respondent No.3 that he being a daily wager could not be transferred to Nahan and further more that the petitioner had wrongly shown that he had joined at Shillai. Respondent No.3 cannot be permitted to raise the second issue since the employer has admitted that the petitioner had joined at Shillai. It is for the Corporation to see whether respondent No.3 can be adjusted at any other place closer to Shillai but a daily wager cannot be heard to say that he should not be disturbed even when a regular employee is posted in his place. 4. No reason whatsoever has been given as to what prompted the respondent-Corporation to cancel the transfer order pursuant to which the petitioner had joined at Shillai. We had called for the records to ascertain why the petitioner was transferred and from the records it is apparent that a note was sent by the Officer on Special Duty to the Hon’ble Chief Minister to the Managing Director, H.P.State Civil Supplies Corporation on 23rd July, 2012 directing that the transfer orders of the petitioner be cancelled. 5. We had called for the records to ascertain why the petitioner was transferred and from the records it is apparent that a note was sent by the Officer on Special Duty to the Hon’ble Chief Minister to the Managing Director, H.P.State Civil Supplies Corporation on 23rd July, 2012 directing that the transfer orders of the petitioner be cancelled. 5. A Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 5351 of 2012, titled as Amir Chand vs. State of H.P. & Ors. on 9.1.2013 has given a detailed judgement in which it is clearly laid down that transfer orders cannot be issued or cancelled without making reference to the administrative department. It is not even clear whether the Hon’ble Chief Minister was apprised that pursuant to the transfer order the petitioner had been relieved and had joined at Shillai. Be that as it may, we find that the transfer order was cancelled without going into any administrative reasons or exigencies. In fact, there is no material on record to show why the transfer order was cancelled. We, therefore, allow the writ petition and quash the order Annexure P-2 dated 23.07.2012 whereby the order dated 20.07.2012 was cancelled. Consequently, the petitioner shall be permitted to continue to work at Shillai. No costs.