ORDER 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner raised singular contention. He urged that petitioner was transferred by an order passed on district level by District Education Officer. He assailed the said order dated 23.11.2019 in W.P.No.26723/2019 which was disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent and in turn, they were directed to decide it. The petitioner preferred a representation before the Commissioner, Public Instructions, the competent authority. It is rejected by the office of District Education Officer who is not competent to take a decision as per Clause 16 of the transfer policy dated 22.6.2019. 2. Learned P.L. opposes the prayer. 3. Clause 16 of the Policy makes it clear that representation received against the transfer order passed from District/Divisional Level shall be considered and decided by Commissioner Public Instructions. In the instant case, the decision is taken by the District Education Officer. Hence, I find force in the arguments of Shri Awasthi and deem it proper to set aside the rejection order dated 28.5.2020 (Annexure P-10) and direct the competent authority/Commissioner to decide the representation expeditiously preferably within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order passed today. 4. Needless to emphasis, because of setting aside the impugned order, the previous order of this Court came into force and accordingly, the petitioner be permitted to work at the present place of positing till decision is taken on the representation. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.