JUDGMENT : K.M. Joseph, C.J. (Oral) Appellant is the writ petitioner. Appellant is an employee of the respondent Bank. The writ petition was filed feeling aggrieved by the transfer /deployment of the appellant. Appellant is aged 59 years. Appellant relies on Clause (vi) to Schedule VI of the Bipartite Settlement, which, inter alia, prohibits, according to the appellant, transfer of a male employee above the age of 56; Appellant is a male employee above the age of 56. Therefore, this transfer/deployment is impugned. 2. The learned Single Judge found that the appellant has been transferred within Nainital district, in fact within the limits of Haldwani town and his present posting is merely three kilometers from his last posting. No hardship was noted. Learned Single Judge refused to interfere. Hence, the present Appeal. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the Bank. 4. Learned counsel for the Bank emphasizes that there is a settlement and the Bank was obliged to act in terms of the settlement. 5. We would think that the facts of this case do not persuade us to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. 6. Undoubtedly, though the appellant is 59 years of age, we notice that, on facts, the appellant is transferred only within the same district and, that too, within three kilometers, though the learned counsel for the appellant would point out that it is five kilometers. Even if it is five kilometers, we would think that we need not proceed under Article 226 of the Constitution. Normally transfers, even of Government employee, are interfered with only on the ground of violation of statutory provision or if there is mala fide. We see no reason to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge, who in exercise of his jurisdiction, refused to interfere with the matter. Accordingly, the Appeal fails and the same is dismissed.