ORDER : Kuldeep Mathur, J. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-R.K. Mishra assailing the validity and correctness of the order dated 13.08.2024 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘learned Tribunal’) Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in Original Application no.409/2024, by which the Original Application (OA) preferred by the petitioner against rejection of his representation seeking transfer to Kendriya Vidyalaya Jaipur from Kendriya Vidyalaya Pali was dismissed. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the petitioner is holding the post of Trained Graduate Teacher (English) with respondent no.1. By an order dated 07.09.2019 the petitioner came to be transferred from KV Jaipur to KV Pali as per the provisions of para 7(e) of the KVS Transfer Guidelines. It is pertinent to note here that para 7(e) of KVS Transfer Guidelines states that an employee can be transferred from a location if the employee’s stay has become prejudicial to the interest of the organisation at any point of time and further if, an employee is transferred by invoking this provision he/she shall not be considered for coming back on the same station on request transfer before the completion of three years stay at the new station. 3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the transfer order dated 07.09.2019 challenged the same before learned Tribunal Bench at Jaipur, by filing OA no.539/2019. The same was dismissed by the learned Tribunal vide order dated 09.10.2019. Being aggrieved by the order dated 09.10.2019 the petitioner approached Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur by way of filing D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17844/2019. The writ petition filed by the petitioner before Hon’ble High Court at Jaipur came to be disposed of vide order dated 16.03.2021 and thereby, the order of learned Tribunal was modified and it was ordered that transfer order dated 07.09.2019 shall be treated in public interest and the part of the order, whereby the provision of para 7(e) of KVS Transfer Guidelines was invoked, was ordered to be deleted. 4. The wife of the petitioner is also an employee of the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and she is presently holding the post of Librarian at KV no.1, Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur. The petitioner after passing of the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court Bench at Jaipur submitted representation to the respondents with a request to post him at any of the school at Jaipur on spouse ground. The petitioner after passing of the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court Bench at Jaipur submitted representation to the respondents with a request to post him at any of the school at Jaipur on spouse ground. The representation of the petitioner was decided by the respondents vide order dated 10.06.2021 and his request to post him in on spouse ground at the same station came to be turned down as there was no vacancy of TGT (English) available at any other KVS at Jaipur. The petitioner challenged legality of the order dated 10.06.2021 by way of filing Original Application no.56/2022 before the learned Tribunal at Jaipur Bench. The learned Tribunal vide order dated 25.02.2022 disposed of the OA with a direction to consider and decide the representation to be submitted by the petitioner within six weeks. The official respondents by complying with the order dated 25.02.2022 considered the representation submitted by the petitioner and rejected the same. 5. Aggrieved by the acts and inaction of the respondents in not considering various representations filed by him, the petitioner again approached the learned Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi. The OA no.1185/2022 filed by the petitioner before the learned Tribunal, New Delhi came to be disposed of vide order dated 02.05.2022 with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide his representation for transfer at any nearby place to Jaipur. The respondents thereupon vide Office Memorandum dated 16.06.2022 informed the petitioner that he cannot be posted at Jaipur or nearby areas. The order dated 16.06.2022 was assailed by the petitioner before the learned Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi in Original Application no.1704/2022. The OA no.1704/2022 came to be dismissed by the learned Tribunal, New Delhi vide order dated 26.07.2022 while observing that an employee in a transferable job has no vested right to be posted at one place. 6. The order dated 26.07.2022 passed by the learned Tribunal, New Delhi was challenged by the petitioner before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in WP (C) no.14394/2022. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court by a detailed order dated 11.10.2022 pleased to dispose of the writ petition filed by the petitioner with liberty to him to make an application under the “Request Transfer” policy framed by the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan. 7. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court by a detailed order dated 11.10.2022 pleased to dispose of the writ petition filed by the petitioner with liberty to him to make an application under the “Request Transfer” policy framed by the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan. 7. In compliance of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court the respondents vide order dated 07.03.2023 informed the petitioner that the Transfer Guidelines were under a review and the same would be finalised after the approval of the Competent Authority. Further, the transfer process would start any time during the next academic session that is, 2023-24 and his case would be considered by the Competent Authority along with the other similarly situated employees. 8. The petitioner thereafter, again submitted Original Application no.290/162/2024 before the learned Tribunal, Jodhpur stating inter-alia that he was having less than 2 years and 5 months left to his retirement therefore as per the Transfer Guidelines II (B)(3) dated 30.06.2023, his representation for transfer to place of choice may be considered. The learned Tribunal, Jodhpur vide order dated 19.04.2024 disposed of the OA with a direction to the respondents to sympathetically consider the representation of the petitioner in terms of extant rules/guidelines. The respondents vide Office Memorandum dated 12.06.2024 again rejected the representation of the petitioner on the ground that the Annual Transfer – 2024 notification had already been issued, providing an opportunity to all employees for applying for transfer by submitting LTR/Spouse Certificates. Further, all the available vacancies had been published on KVS Website for due consideration of all the employees through the Online Transfer Potral – 2024 in transparent manner. It was also explained in the Office Memorandum dated 12.06.2024 that KVS strives to maintain a fair and just distribution of resources while considering the ongoing promotions, routine work, and the interests of all employees and in the event that vacancies arise later, it becomes challenging to allocate them specific teacher due to more number of teachers seeking transfers to those particular stations. It was further provided that allocating vacancies under such circumstances would be unjust to other teachers who would have expressed a genuine interest/ground to those locations and therefore at that stage, transfer of the applicant as and when vacancies arise would be arbitrarily, which might lead to many litigations. 9. It was further provided that allocating vacancies under such circumstances would be unjust to other teachers who would have expressed a genuine interest/ground to those locations and therefore at that stage, transfer of the applicant as and when vacancies arise would be arbitrarily, which might lead to many litigations. 9. The validity of the order dated 12.06.2024 came to be challenged by the petitioner by way of filing Original Application no.409/2024 before the learned Tribunal, Jodhpur. The learned Tribunal, Jodhpur after hearing all the parties vide order dated 13.08.2024 dismissed the OA filed by the petitioner by observing that the petitioner is not acting in a bonafide manner and is changing the forums for adjudication of his grievances at his convenience. The petitioner despite the fact that the representations submitted by the petitioner have been considered and rejected as per the Transfer Policy in vogue is raising the same issue again and again on the same ground. The learned Tribunal has also imposed a cost of Rs.20,000/- upon the petitioner by raising the cause which had already finalised in previous litigation. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned Tribunal in its order dated 13.08.2024 failed to appreciate that the petitioner has been harassed and humiliated by the respondents without any valid reason or justification. It was contended that the petitioner was compelled to approach various judicial forums by the respondents. The petitioner who is aged about 58 years is entitled to be considered for transfer under his last term to retire LTR category as per the provisions of Transfer Guidelines – 2023. However, the respondents in utter disregard to the Transfer Policy are not transferring him to KV at Jaipur where his wife is already posted. Learned counsel submitted that the various representations submitted by the petitioner seeking transfer to Jaipur have been rejected in a pre-determined manner and in utter disregard to the Transfer Policies of the Transfer Guidelines – 2023. Learned counsel submitted that the impugned order dated 13.08.2024 passed by learned Tribunal may be interfered with and official respondents be directed to transfer/post the petitioner at KV Jaipur, where his wife is working. 11. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 12. The learned Tribunal in the impugned order dated 13.08.2024 while dismissing the OA. 11. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 12. The learned Tribunal in the impugned order dated 13.08.2024 while dismissing the OA. no.409/2024 has observed as under :- “7.4 It is pertinent to note that after being posted at Pali, the applicant invoked the jurisdiction at his convenience of CAT Jaipur Bench, Principal Bench, Delhi and thereafter in the year 2024 invoked the jurisdiction of this bench, whereas he should not have changed the forum at his convenience. The above act of the applicant appears not of bona fide nature. The applicant never succeeded on merit in any litigation filed against rejection of his request to get posting at Jaipur, but taking the sympathy of the Court of Law, he succeeded in getting direction against the respondents to decide the representation filed by him sympathetically. However it is pertinent to note that the representation dated 13.02.2024 and 01.04.2024 were not made pursuant to any liberty granted by any Court. 7.5 So far as the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that para 3 of the Transfer Policy 2023 gives the employee right for consideration to be posted at desired placed on spouse grounds, we are of the view that this provision gives right to Commissioner to post an employee in exceptional circumstance against clear-cut vacancies even after completion of the transfer process. Perusal of the record reveals that the respondents have already considered the case of the applicant and passed a reasoned order and the same have been passed through judicial review. Therefore, the applicant cannot be allowed to raise the issue again and again on the same ground. In view of this OA is not maintainable. Therefore, while dismissing the instant OA we direct the applicant to refrain from filing another OA before any bench of this tribunal seeking the same relief. Looking at the conduct of the applicant, we deem it a fit case to impose a cost of Rs. 20,000/- upon the applicant for wasting valuable time of this Tribunal by raising the case already finalised in previous litigation. The cost shall be paid to the respondents. In case of failure, the respondents shall deduct the same from his salary/pension.” 13. The record of the case clearly indicates that the petitioner who is holding a transferable post somehow wanted to be transferred at a particular place. The cost shall be paid to the respondents. In case of failure, the respondents shall deduct the same from his salary/pension.” 13. The record of the case clearly indicates that the petitioner who is holding a transferable post somehow wanted to be transferred at a particular place. The record further indicates that time and again petitioner as per his convenience has approached different judicial forums seeking the same relief that is transfer to KV Jaipur. It is pertinent to note here that the respondents have not only considered the various representations submitted by the petitioner for transfer from KV Pali to KV Jaipur, pursuant to various judicial orders but have also passed reasoned orders justifying their action. 14. By now, it is too well settled that an order of transfer of an employee is a part of service condition and such order of transfer is not required to be interfered by a Court of Law unless the Court finds that either the order is malafide; or that the service rules prohibit such transfer; or that the authorities, who issued the order, did not have the competence to pass the order. An employee cannot insist for transfer/posting at a particular place/place of his choice. Transfer from one place to another is generally a condition of service and the choice of the employee in such matters is immaterial. It is also to be noticed that the Transfer Policy/Guidelines by themselves do not create any legal right in favour of the employee and the same is not a judicially enforceable legal right. The existence of the fundamental/legal right is a condition precedent for invoking the Court’s jurisdiction. 15. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 13.08.2024 passed by the learned Tribunal in OA no.409/2024; “R.K. Mishra v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors.” does not call for any interference by this Court. However, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is aged about 58 years and nearing his retirement from service, the cost of Rs.20,000/- imposed upon him by the learned Tribunal is set aside. 16. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. 17. No order as to cost.