JUDGMENT : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the office order as contained in Memo No.512 dated 21.02.2025, whereby the services of the petitioner, who is an Assistant Teachercum-Second Officer of NCC in Scheduled Castes Residential High School, Kamre, Ranchi, was transferred to the Scheduled Castes Residential Primary School, Hargarwa, Chandwa, Latehar. 2. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondents. 3. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a NCC Trainer and he could not have been transferred to Scheduled Caste Residential Primary School, Hargarwa, Chandwa, Latehar, as the said School does not have NCC facility. This is the only ground, on which he is challenging the said transfer. 4. Learned counsel representing the respondent - State, submits that the transfer is an incidence of service and the same is not punitive. He submits that there is nothing to suggest that the petitioner was appointed solely on the qualification of NCC and there is nothing to suggest that he cannot be transferred. 5. The petitioner is an Assistant Teacher in Scheduled Castes Residential High School, Kamre, Ranchi-cum-second Officer of NCC. As per the impugned order, the petitioner has been transferred to the Scheduled Castes Residential Primary School, Hargarwa, Chandwa, Latehar. 6. From para-9 of the memo of instant writ petition, I find that on 29.06.2016, the petitioner was transferred from Middle School, Thalkobad, Samprati, Manoharpur, West Singhbhum to High School, Kamre, Ranchi, i.e. his present place of posting, from where he is transferred. From 29.06.2016 to 21.02.2025, the petitioner is in Kamre, Ranchi. The petitioner has spent nine years in one School. Now, he has been transferred in the District of Latehar. 7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Punjab & Sind Bank v. Durgesh Kuwar reported in (2020) 19 SCC 46 (para-17) , has held as hereunder:- “ 17. We must begin our analysis of the rival submissions by adverting to the settled principle that transfer is an exigency of service. An employee cannot have a choice of postings. Administrative circulars and guidelines are indicators of the manner in which the transfer policy has to be implemented. However, an administrative circular may not in itself confer a vested right which can be enforceable by a writ of mandamus. An employee cannot have a choice of postings. Administrative circulars and guidelines are indicators of the manner in which the transfer policy has to be implemented. However, an administrative circular may not in itself confer a vested right which can be enforceable by a writ of mandamus. Unless an order of transfer is established to be mala fide or contrary to a statutory provision or has been issued by an authority not competent to order transfer, the Court in exercise of judicial review would not be inclined to interfere. These principles emerge from the judgments which have been relied upon by the appellants in support of their submissions and to which we have already made a reference above. There can be no dispute about the position in law.” 8. None of the criteria of the aforesaid judgment is satisfied by the petitioner. Further, no Rule has been put forth to suggest that the petitioner cannot be transferred to Latehar. Further, the reason of transfer given in the impugned order is that the Teachers are superannuating and permanent Teacher needs to be placed in those School, which lacks permanent Teacher. Considering this broader prospective, the petitioner has been transferred to Latehar. The transfer order is not punitive and it has also the concurrence of the Minister of the Department and has been passed by the competent Authority. Further, the transfer order is neither stigmatic nor the same has been passed by way of punishment. It also needs to be pointed out that transfer is an incident of service. Thus, I find no ground to interfere with the transfer order. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.