Judgment Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. 1. Since, in a similar matter before this Court, no interference was made by this Court at all. The order passed by this Court was challenged in Special Appeal before the Division Bench. In Special Appeal the order passed by this Court was slightly modified and direction was given to respondent No. 2 to decide the pending representation of the petitioner. The order passed in Special Appeal No. 467 of 2014 (dated 10.09.2014), reads as under:- “Appellant is a writ petitioner. The writ petition was filed feeling aggrieved by a transfer order of the appellant from Tehri Garwhal to Pauri Garwhal. Appellant is an Accountant. According to the appellant, he is of 55 years and his wife is an Assistant Teacher. The learned Single Judge took a view that the appellant had a long stay at Tehri Garwhal. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are inclined to modify the order and dispose of the Appeal by directing representation dated 8th August, 2014 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) to be considered by the 2nd respondent. Accordingly, we modify the order of the learned Single Judge and dispose of the Appeal by directing the 2nd respondent to consider and take a decision on the said representation of the appellant in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment before him.” 2. The learned counsel for the State accepts the factual aspect of the matter. 3. This matter is also disposed of with the above directions given in Special Appeal and the petitioner is at liberty to move fresh representation before respondent No. 2 Commissioner, Rural Development, Uttarakhand, Pauri Garwhal, who shall consider the case of the petitioner and decide the representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 4. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.