JUDGMENT : 1. In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for quashing Wireless Message dated 24.05.2017 (Annexure-9) whereby petitioner has been transferred from 133 Battalion located at Ranchi to 152 Battalion, located at Goalpara (Assam). 2. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajiv Sinha, learned A.S.G.I for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner served the department with full devotion and dedication and given her strong contribution for fighting against Naxalite, for which, she has been given commendation certificates and other awards. It has been stated that because of such achievements, she became eyesore for a particular section of employees and became victim of conspiracy in the hands of such persons, as such, a criminal case being R.C. Case No. 06(A)/2016-R was instituted against her. However, all of a sudden, vide Fax Message dated 20.04.2017 petitioner was transferred to Andhra Pradesh, against which, the petitioner submitted representation stating therein that she is required to attend the Court of learned Special Judge, CBI at Ranchi twice a month besides taking other grounds. The respondent-authority after considering the grounds taken by the petitioner, revoked the order of transfer. But again, all of a sudden vide wireless message dated 24.05.2017 she has been transferred to Goalpara, Assam. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted with vehemence that it is not possible for the petitioner to attend the Court at Ranchi twice in a month, as it would consume more time to travel. Besides, the petitioner has two minor children and mother of the petitioner is a mental patient whose treatment is undergoing at CIP, Ranchi. Hence, practically it is not possible for the petitioner to manage all the affairs. 4. Mr. Rajiv Sinha, learned ASGI appearing for the respondent-UOI on instructions submits that the petitioner has already been relieved on 30th May, 2017 and in her place another person, Simon Mao has already joined at Ranchi. On merit of the case, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the impugned order of transfer is not mala fide rather it has been issued in the interest of administration and it is a routine transfer. 5. On merit of the case, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the impugned order of transfer is not mala fide rather it has been issued in the interest of administration and it is a routine transfer. 5. After having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties at length and on perusal of the materials available on record, it appears that impugned order of transfer is not actuated by mala fide exercise of power nor there is any violation of any mandatory or statutory rules to warrant interference by this Court. Furthermore, the petitioner has already been relieved and in her place another person has joined. Hence, this Court does not find any cogent ground to interfere with the impugned order of transfer. 6. Hence, the writ petition sans merit, is dismissed. However, dismissal of the writ petition shall not preclude the petitioner from filing representation, if so legally advised and if such representation is filed before the respondents-authorities, the same shall be considered on its own merit.