JUDGMENT : The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the transfer order, dated 22.03.2021 (Annexure P-1), vide which he has been transferred from the CID Unit to district Kinnaur. 2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present petition are as under:- The petitioner joined the Police Department as a constable on 14.03.1988. According to the petitioner, after his appointment he has served at various places from time to time. He has an un-blemished service record of more than 32 years. Vide Office Order dated 26.07.2019, he was transferred from District Kinnaur to the CID Unit. According to the petitioner, while discharging his duties in CID Unit there has never been any complaint against him from any quarter. As per the petitioner, he has been transferred vide impugned transfer order dated 22.03.2021 from the CID Unit to district Kinnaur without any cogent reason and without allowing him to complete his normal tenure of three years. According to the petitioner, there are number of constables serving in the CID, who have more than five years service in the Unit, whereas the petitioner has been victimized by adopting pick and choose basis. According to him, the impugned transfer order is in violation of instructions dated 19.11.2020, issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which are applicable to the Police Department of the State also, in terms whereof no transfer or adjustment is to be permitted during the period when there is ban of transfers, without the permission of the Worthy Chief Minister and in the present case no approval was sought from the Worthy Chief Minister. It is on these basis that this Writ Petition has been filed, praying for the following relief:- “(a) quash and set aside the impugned transfer order passed vide Annexure P/1 dated 22.03.2021.” 3. In its response, filed to the petition, the respondents have taken the stand that transfer of the petitioner from the CID Unit to district Kinnaur has been ordered on the basis of the recommendations made by the State Police Establishment Committee after due deliberation on receipt of reference from the highest administrative authorities vide transfer order dated 22.03.2021. In its response, filed to the petition, the respondents have taken the stand that transfer of the petitioner from the CID Unit to district Kinnaur has been ordered on the basis of the recommendations made by the State Police Establishment Committee after due deliberation on receipt of reference from the highest administrative authorities vide transfer order dated 22.03.2021. It is further the stand of said respondents that the CID is a sensitive and specialized Organization which provides critical inputs to the government and therefore, it is the prerogative of the employer, as to which official is to be selected/kept in the CID Unit for the stated purpose as per their suitability. It is further mentioned in the reply that as the petitioner is serving against a transferable job, therefore, it is the prerogative of the employer to post its employee at any place where it deems proper and the transfer of the petitioner was made only after due diligence and after affording an opportunity of being heard to him. On these basis, the respondents have prayed for the dismissal of this writ petition. 4. By way of rejoinder, the petitioner while reiterating the grounds taken in the writ petition has also mentioned that his transfer has been made on political grounds on the basis of a D.O. Note, which also renders said transfer bad in law. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith. 6. The petitioner is serving as a constable in the Police Department. The post of constable is a district cadre post. The petitioner is serving as such in district Kinnaur. He was transferred vide transfer order dated 26.07.2019 (Annexure P-3) from district Kinnaur to the CID Unit. Now, the respondent-department in its wisdom has transferred the petitioner from the CID Unit back to district Kinnaur vide impugned order dated 22.03.2021 (Annexure P1). 7. This Court is of the considered view that as CID indeed is a sensitive organization, the prerogative of the employer as to who is to be posted in the CID Unit, should not be interfered by the Court until and unless on the face of it, it can be demonstrated that the power of transfer has been exercised by the employer in a completely arbitrary manner. In the present case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate the same. In the present case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate the same. The contention of the petitioner that his transfer is bad as the same was done during the period of ban on transfers which entails permission of the Worthy Chief Minister which was not obtained in his case, is belied from the record as the same demonstrates that transfer of the petitioner was on the basis of approval, so granted qua the transfers of the officials mentioned in Annexure P-1 by the Worthy Chief Minister, who the Court has been informed, also is the head of the Home Department to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, under which the Police Department falls. 8. Further, a perusal of Annexure P-1, i.e. the impugned transfer order, demonstrates that it is not as if, it is a solitary transfer order vide which the petitioner only has been transferred. In terms of this order, twenty other officials have also been transferred, which demonstrates that it was a routine transfer order and not one which has been issued just to harass the petitioner. 9. Though, in the rejoinder, a plea has been taken by the petitioner that the transfer order is bad as the same is on the basis of a D.O. Note, however, in the main petition, neither there was any such averment, nor in the rejoinder it has been mentioned that on whose D.O. Note, the petitioner has been transferred. 10. Even otherwise, this Court is of the considered view that if the petitioner is to allege malafidies, then the person concerned, against whom malafidies are alleged, has to be implied as a party respondent with specific allegations of malafidies, so that such person gets an opportunity to refute it, which has not been done by the petitioner in this case. 11. Accordingly, as this Court does not finds any infirmity with the impugned transfer order dated 22.03.2021 (Annexure P-1) and further taking into consideration the fact that the transfer is an incidence of service and that the petitioner belongs to a disciplined force, this petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed. 12. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.