JUDGMENT Diploma Pashu Chikitsha Sangh, U.P. through its President Vashist Narayan Singh has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to implement the transfer policy dated 11 May 2016 in its true letter and spirit; take a decision on the request of the petitioner for transfer of respondent no.6 outside district Gorakhpur and to decide the representations dated 26 July 2016 and 5 August 2016 filed in that regard by the petitioner. Dr. K.P. Singh, the sixth respondent is stated to be holding the post of Chief Veterinary Officer, Gorakhpur. He is having additional charge of Additional Director Grade II, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur. The grievance of the petitioner is that the sixth respondent is posted as Chief Veterinary Officer, Gorakhpur since the year 2008 and has yet not been transferred despite the transfer policy dated 11 May 2016, whereunder an incumbent, who has completed a six years tenure in a particular district, has to be transferred to another district. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the State Government is bound to implement its own transfer policy and by not transferring the sixth respondent from district Gorakhpur, albeit a period of six years having expired, its action is illegal and arbitrary. It is submitted that the employees working under him are dissatisfied with his style of working and espousing their cause, the petitioner Union had made complaints against him, which are being enquired into by Dr. Uday Pratap Singh, Upper Nideshak, Grade II, Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh. It is urged that in such circumstances, a direction be issued to the respondents to ensure his transfer forthwith from district Gorakhpur. The transfer policy envisages that officers of Group A and B, who have completed a six years tenure in a particular district, should be transferred to other district. Likewise, those who have completed 10 years in a particular region, should be transferred outside that region. However, under Clause 5 the total number of such transfers should not exceed 10% of the total strength of the officials. There is no assertion in the writ petition that the aforesaid upper limit of 10% does not stand exhausted consequent to the transfers which had been effected by the State Government in pursuance of its transfer policy. However, under Clause 5 the total number of such transfers should not exceed 10% of the total strength of the officials. There is no assertion in the writ petition that the aforesaid upper limit of 10% does not stand exhausted consequent to the transfers which had been effected by the State Government in pursuance of its transfer policy. Moreover, it is now well settled that violation of the transfer policy, which is in the nature of an executive instruction, does not confer right on any person to get it enforced through a court of law. The petitioner, who claims to be espousing the grievance of the employees of the Veterinary department, has not disclosed in the writ petition about its status and the persons who are its members. It seems that the writ petition has been filed with the motive of bringing one Kamal Singh, Chief Veterinary Officer, Maharajganj as Additional Director in place of the sixth respondent, as in paragraph 9 of the writ petition it is asserted that Kamal Singh is senior to the sixth respondent and thus was entitled to be given the additional charge of Additional Director, Grade II instead of the sixth respondent. We, therefore, do not find the instant petition to be a bonafide one and consequently, decline to interfere in the matter at the instance of the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed but with a clarification that we have not upheld the action of the State Government in not transferring the sixth respondent and leave the said issue open for being considered in an appropriate matter.