JUDGMENT Heard Mr. S.N. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Amitabh Rai, learned Standing Counsel. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 27 July 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in writ petition No. 15763 (SS) of 2016. The learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate that the fact that the petitioner being Class IV employee was transferred from District Raebareli to District Kheri in public interest, whereas provisions contained in U.P. Police Group-D Employees Service Rules, 2009 (as amended in 2014) permit the transfer of Class IV employees either on administrative ground or on his own request. In the present case both the ingredients were not available for consideration of the appellant's transfer, but the appellant has been transferred which is in violation of the Rules, 2014. In reply, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the learned Single Judge has summoned the appellant's service record and found that the Police Establishment Board had considered the appellant's transfer on the basis of recommendation of Superintendent of Police, Raebareli who had recommended the appellant's transfer on the basis of various instances of indiscipline, misconduct, misdemeanour and has ultimately observed that the appellant's transfer was made on administrative ground that being so, such proceeding of transfer is permissible under Rule,2014. Therefore, it cannot be said the the appellant's transfer is in violation of rules. The learned Counsel for the appellant had also taken a plea before the learned Single Judge that on the basis of administrative exegencies the transfer is not a remedy, and if the employees transferred on the administrative ground that would be punitive to his career, he has also cited the case of Supreme Court Somesh Tiwari Vs. Union of India and other, reported in [ (2009) 2 SCC 592 ]. Whereas after considering the rival submission of learned counsel for the parties as well as perusal of record, we found that keeping in view his past conduct during the course of discharge of duties the appellant was not found fit to retain in the office. Therefore, the Superintendent of Police had recommended his transfer to some where else which has been approved by the Police Establishment Board. Thus it is a simplicitor transfer and cannot be said to be punitive. With the aforesaid observations, the appeal stands dismissed.