IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16205 of 2008 Between: M.Narendram S/o.Gopal Reddy O/o. General Manager, Telecom District, Karimnagar. ..... PETITIONER AND The Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited, rep. by its General Manager, Telecom District, Karimnagar. .....RESPONDENT 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 to issue a writ or order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus: i. declare the action of the respondent in including the petitioner name in the list of counseling for effecting transfer as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Transfer policy dated 13.5.2008 and set aside the letter No.E-1-192/TOAs/Tfr.Policy/08-09/60 dated at KAA the 23-07-2008, in so far as petitioner is concerned ii. direct the respondent to continue the petitioner in the Office of the General Manager Telecom District, Karimnagar. iii. and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VASUDEVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.(SC FOR B.S.N.L) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16205 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is working as a Senior Telephone Supervisor in the B.S.N.L. and at present, he is stationed at Karimnagar. The respondents have conducted counseling on 25.07.2008 for various employees, in the context of their transfer. The petitioner was also invited and it is stated that he is proposed to be transferred to Sircilla. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the proposal of the respondents and places reliance upon Clause 13(iii) of Section-D of the transfer policy, dated 13.05.2008. The petitioner contends that even according to the policy, the persons, who attain the age of 56 years, shall be exempted from the transfer, involving change of station, and the action of the respondents is contrary to the same. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is true that under Clause 13(iii) of Section-D of the transfer policy, the transfer of employees, who attain the age of 55 or 56 years, as the case may be, is not to be resorted to generally or ordinarily. However, there is no absolute prohibition against them. There is some dispute as to whether the petitioner has attained 56 or 55 years as on the notified date. Apart from that, the place, to which the petitioner is sought to be transferred, is not that far away, as to be treated as prohibited. Inasmuch as no absolute prohibition is contained in the clause relied upon by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. It is, however, made clear that in case, there exists any vacancy at Karimnagar, that can accommodate the petitioner, his case shall be considered. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 28.07.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16205 of 2008 Date: 28.07.2008 JSU