Order : 1. The petitioner before this Court is assailing an order dated 28/30.12.2022 (Annex.-4), vide which she was transferred from Sri Ganganagar to Suratgarh. 2. During the pendency of writ proceedings, a co-ordinate bench of this Court, then seized of the matter, passed an interim order dated 09.01.2023 staying the implementation of the transfer order of the petitioner. Same being apposite is reproduced hereinbelow:- “1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been subjected to frequent transfer and within a period of two years she has been transferred on four occasions. 2. Issue notice. Issue notice of stay application also, returnable within six weeks. 3. Meanwhile, effect and operation of the order dated30.12.2022 (Annex.4) shall remain stayed.” 3. Aforesaid stay order continues to subsist in favour of the petitioner till date. 4. Transfers are a standard and integral aspect of government employment conditions. Employees do not possess an inherent right to demand continuation of their service at a specific location. 5. This Court ordinarily refrains from intervening in transfer matters, acknowledging administrative needs for employees to fulfill their duties at assigned locations. 6. In the instant case, given the duration of the interim protection granted by this Court, its utility appears to have waned over time. 7. Be that as it may, the interim order is made absolute, but with liberty to the respondents to pass fresh orders in future, if necessary due to administrative exigency. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that passing of the fresh order would require a prior sanction from the competent authority in view of the ban imposed on transfers by the Government vide Chief Secretary's order dated 04.01.2023, which was subsequently clarified vide an administrative circular/order dated 03.01.2024. 9. In the premise, in order to obviate any procedural or administrative hurdle, it is made clear that since the liberty has been granted by way of issuance of writ of this Court, in the nature of mandamus, thus fresh decision, if warranted, qua the petitioner shall be construed to be in continuation of his earlier transfer order impugned herein. No further prior sanction would be required in terms of the order dated 04.01.2023 ibid. 10. No further prior sanction would be required in terms of the order dated 04.01.2023 ibid. 10. However, in the parting, it is made clear that granting liberty to pass fresh order is not to be construed as a direction of this Court to necessarily do the same even if there is no such requirement otherwise. 11. Disposed of as above. 12. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.