ORDER : BHARGAV D. KARIA, J. 1. Heard learned advocate Mr.T.R.Mishra for learned advocate Mr.Rameshbhai M. Patel for the appellant and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Vaishnavi Verma for the respondents. 2. By this Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, 1865, the appellant-original petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 08.12.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.16595 of 2025. 3. The brief facts of the case are as under: 3.1. The appellant was serving as Vidhya Sahayak since 2008 and was initially posted at Morwala Village Primary School on 08.12.2008 and continued to work till 10.07.2015. Thereafter, due to internal transfer, the appellant was posted at Moti Robas Primary School on 11.07.2015 and since then, the appellant is working at Moti Robas Primary School, Taluka:Deesa, District:Banaskantha. The appellant got married on 20 th January, 2012, however, a decree of divorce was passed on 07.04.2022. Thus, the appellant is a divorcee discharging her duties as Vidhya Sahayak. The appellant thereafter made an application for transfer to her parental hometown i.e. Talod, Dist: Aravalli on 18.08.2025, however, the said application was rejected on 08.09.2025 by the respondents and the same was communicated to the appellant. 3.2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 08.09.2025, the appellant preferred Special Civil Application No.16595 of 2025 which was dismissed by learned Single Judge. 3.3. Hence, the appellant has preferred this Appeal. 4.1. Learned advocate Mr.T.R.Mishra for the appellant referred to and relied upon the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008 whereby, the benefit of 20% post was reserved for divorcees, however, the said Government Resolution was cancelled vide Government Resolution dated 23.05.2012. It was submitted that thereafter Government Resolution dated 01.04.2022 was issued, wherein, the Government Resolution dated 23.05.2012 is cancelled and therefore, according to him Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008 is restored. 4.2. It was also pointed out by learned advocate Mr.T.R.Mishra that reliance placed on Government Resolution dated 11.05.2023 by the respondents does not state that the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008 is cancelled and there is no mention in the preamble of the said Government Resolution and therefore, according to the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008, the appellant is entitled to the 20% reservation for divorcee. 4.3. Learned advocate Mr.T.R.Mishra submitted that the learned Single Judge, however, dismissed the petition considering the prevailing Government Resolution dated 11.05.2023 by observing as under : “7. 4.3. Learned advocate Mr.T.R.Mishra submitted that the learned Single Judge, however, dismissed the petition considering the prevailing Government Resolution dated 11.05.2023 by observing as under : “7. Heard learned Advocate for the parties and on perusal of the record, I find that today’s transfer policy of primary teachers is governed by G. R. dated 11.05.2023 and though at ones upon a time, the transfer policy provided for reservation in respect of divorced lady to the extent of 20% along with widow, handicapped and divorced person today there is no such policy and as on the basis of statement by way of instruction given by responsible officer that G. R. Dated 01.04.2008 is not enforced, the petitioner can not claim her transfer to any primary school in or nearby Talod Taluka or Talod Towon as a matter of right. 8. Further it is well-settled by now that transfer is an incident of service and herein the instant case, the petitioner has not even been transferred, there is a specific transfer policy in place in Inter District Transfer which at present is governed by policy of the State Government which is carved vide G.R. dated 11.05.2023 and the said policy does not provide for any reservation in respect of divorced ladies for Inter District Transfer hence, petitioner has no wasted or approved right to seek transfer to the district of her choice or the place of her choice in respect of her status of a divorced lady.” 5. Before this Court also, learned advocate Mr.T.R.Mishra for the appellant reiterated the same submissions and requested that sympathetic view may be taken for the appellant, who is a divorcee. It was pointed out that the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008 has not been changed or superseded and the same still holds the field and therefore, the case of the petitioner ought to have been considered in view of the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008 whereby, 20% reservation in respect of divorcees is provided. 6. Having heard learned advocate Mr.T.R.Mishra for the appellant and considering the Government Resolutions dated 01.04.2008, 23.05.2012, 01.04.2022 and 11.05.2023, it appears that the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008 provided 20% reservation, however, the said Government Resolution was cancelled by the subsequent Government Resolution dated 23.05.2012 for formulating the transfer policy for the Vidhya Sahayak. 6. Having heard learned advocate Mr.T.R.Mishra for the appellant and considering the Government Resolutions dated 01.04.2008, 23.05.2012, 01.04.2022 and 11.05.2023, it appears that the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008 provided 20% reservation, however, the said Government Resolution was cancelled by the subsequent Government Resolution dated 23.05.2012 for formulating the transfer policy for the Vidhya Sahayak. By Government Resolution dated 01.04.2022, again the new policy has come into effect which does not provide for any such reservation and therefore, whether the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008 is in existence or not would be immaterial, similarly, the Government Resolution dated 11.05.2023 also does not provide any reservation or reference to the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008, as it only refers to the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2022. 7. Therefore, we are in agreement with the observation made by the learned Single Judge that transfer is an incident of service and therefore, the appellant cannot insist upon the transfer at her parental hometown, in view of her divorce in the year 2022, as a matter of right and there is no reservation provided either in the Government Resolution dated 01.04.2022 or 11.05.2023 to the divorcees and therefore, the reliance placed by the appellant on Government Resolution dated 01.04.2008 is misplaced and appellant has no vested right to seek transfer on basis of the policy, which is replaced by the subsequent policy for transfer, providing Rules for transfer of the Vidhya Sahayak. 8. The Appeal therefore, being devoid of any merit, is accordingly dismissed.