https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287681 The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision to quash the transfer of Respondent No. 5, emphasizing that the High Court's assessment of the officer's competence was unwarranted. The Court clarified that the transfer of the Writ Petitioner was not stigmatic, and any adverse observations in the order should not prejudice him. The appeal of Respondent No. 5 was allowed, and the appeal of the Writ Petitioner was dismissed. Each party was directed to bear their own costs. en-us Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Apr 2020 12:16:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287681 The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision to quash the transfer of Respondent No. 5, emphasizing that the High Court's assessment of the officer's competence was unwarranted. The Court clarified that the transfer of the Writ Petitioner was not stigmatic, and any adverse observations in the order should not prejudice him. The appeal of Respondent No. 5 was allowed, and the appeal of the Writ Petitioner was dismissed. Each party was directed to bear their own costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287681