ORDER 1. This intra Court Appeal u/S. 2 (1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khandpeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 assails the final order dated 10.11.2020 in WP.No.14163/2020 [Published in 2021(1) MPWN 18] by which learned Single Judge while exercising writ jurisdiction u/Art. 226 of the Constitution has disposed of the petition in question by which challenge was made to the order of transfer of services of petitioner who is Food Safety Inspector from District Bhind to District Anuppur. 2. Learned Single Judge has relied upon decision of Division Bench of this Court in R.S.Chaudhary v. State of M.P [ILR (2007) MP 1329] and Mridul Kumar Sharma v. State of M.P. 2015 (III) MPWN 25 = [I.L.R (2015) MP 2556] to come to a conclusion that none of the legitimate grounds for successfully challenging order of transfer of services are made out and therefore, petition has been disposed of with direction to employer to consider representation of petitioner by passing speaking order. 3. Learned counsel for appellant submits that action of respondents in transferring the petitioner within a span of six months since last transfer from Shivpuri to Bhind which was made on request of petitioner owing to ailment of father, belies employer's claim of being model employer. 3.1 Another ground that has been taken is that petitioner is suffering from 50% physical disability and policy of transfer framed by the Govt. vide P/4 dated 4th June, 2019 grants partial immunity to such person and therefore, protection under the transfer policy ought to have been extended. By referring to clause 11.12 of policy it is submitted by learned counsel for appellant that employee who faces disability of 40% or more, ordinarily should be transferred at the place of his choice. It is submitted that on request of petitioner he had been transferred from Shivpuri to Bhind to look after his ailing father and also due to his physical disability but now he has been again shifted within 8 months to a place which is approx 1000 km away. 3.2 The factum of appellant facing physical disability and that he has recently come to Bhind on his own request on compassionate ground does not appear to have received attention of the employer and to that extent, impugned order of transfer appears to be arbitrary and thus prima facie violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. 4. 3.2 The factum of appellant facing physical disability and that he has recently come to Bhind on his own request on compassionate ground does not appear to have received attention of the employer and to that extent, impugned order of transfer appears to be arbitrary and thus prima facie violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. 4. Issue notice to respondents on payment of process-fee within next three working days failing which appeal shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to this Bench. 5. Meanwhile, till next date of hearing, effect and operation of impugned order Annexure-P/1 dated 18.9.2020 passed by Joint Controller Food & Drugs Administration, M.P. Bhopal shall remain stayed. In case appellant has been relieved, he shall be allowed to join back. 6. List in the week commencing 21.12.2020. R.P. Singh for appellant; Ankur Mody, Additional Advocate General for State.