IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 415 of 2009 Between: G. Bikshapathi S/o. Late G. Narsimha Ramaiah O/o.Superintending Engineering, Operation Cirlcle, NPDC of A.P. Ltd., Warangal. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Northern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited, Corporate Office, Warangal, rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director. 2 The Superintending Engineering / Operation, Warangal. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the M e m o No.CGM(HRD)/GM(S)/AS(Estt.)/PO.A/F.A.O/1207-A2/08 dated 31.12.2008 where under transferring the petitioner from the office of the 2nd respondent on promotion as In-charge AO/Expr., Karimnagar, due to his retirement on 31.03.2009 is illegal, arbitrary, null and void and also contrary to the Memo No.CMD/CGM(HRD)/GM(S)/AS(Estt.)/PO.A/386-A/08-2, dated 16.06.2008 and as the petitioner's date of retirement date is 31.03.2009, and consequently direct the respondents to retain the petitioner at Warangal as In-charge AO/CRP/Corporate Office, NPDCL/Warangal, till his retirement dated 31.03.2009. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.S.V.INDIRA Counsel for the Respondent No.: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : ORDER This writ petition has been filed by G.Bikshapathi assailing the proceedings dated 31.12.2008 whereunder he has been transferred as In-charge Accounts Officer, Karimnagar from the office of the 2nd respondent- Superintending Engineer/Operation, Warangal. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is retiring shortly i.e., on 31.3.2009. He made a representation dated 31.12.2008 and the same remained un-attended. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that if the petitioner does not want promotion and he wants retention in Warangal in the same post, he is at liberty to make a representation. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit a representation to the 1st respondent, in which case the 1st respondent has to consider the same and pass appropriate orders. No costs. _________ 20-1-2009 Note: Issue wire at party’s costs. (B.O)rkk