THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.18774 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings No.E-38014/HPCL(VR)/Adm.I/20100819, dated 24.07.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent and office order dated 26.07.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and direct the respondents to continue the petitioner at CISF Unit, HPCL (VR & BP) Vizag. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he joined the service in the year 1982 as Constable and at present he is working as Head Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force under the control of the 3rd respondent. While things stood thus, the 3rd respondent issued Memorandum dated 14.05.2010 transferring the petitioner to MCF Bhopal, on instruction of DIG, dated 28.04.2010. Immediately, when he came to know about his transfer, he made a representation dated 06.05.2010 to the 1st respondent as well as the DIG for deferment of transfer for one more year on the ground of his son’s education, who is studying B.Sc. final year. Though the 3rd respondent recommended his case to the higher authorities, but eventually, the 3rd respondent vide his letter dated 26.07.2010 informed him that the competent authority examined his case and rejected. It is submitted that though the authorities can consider his case vide Circular No.1/2008, positively, they have not considered the same but blatantly rejected. Hence, the present writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, counter affidavit has been filed, inter alia, submitting that as the petitioner has completed three years of service in the Unit and as per the posting policy of the department, his name was included for inter unit transfer 2010, as per the guidelines of the higher formation. After knowing his transfer, he made a representation that was forwarded to the higher officials and after considering his case rejected his request. Thereafter, the petitioner was directed to collect the movement order and railway warrant on 26.07.2010 for his move to the new place of posting. Instead of moving to new place of posting, the petitioner filed the present writ petition questioning the order of his transfer. It is also submitted that on 04.08.2010 when the matter has been listed for admission, this Court was not inclined to pass any order with respect to his transfer. At that stage, on behalf of the respondents it was submitted that his ward will be accommodated in a hostel for which, the petitioner came up with a plea that he lost one son and sought for retention of family quarters till his son completes his education. Later, the respondents verified the records and came to know that the petitioner never lost a son. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is under occupation of a quarter at Visakhapatnam and he may be permitted to retain the quarter till his son’s education is completed as his son is studying B.Sc. final year. Heard the learned counsel and perused the material on record. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is an employee of the respondents. The petitioner was transferred from Visakhapatnam to Industrial unit at Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. From a perusal of the proceedings, this Court on 04.08.2010 passed the following order, which reads as under: “Notice before admission returnable in four weeks. Sri N.V. Ramanujam, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents seeks four weeks’ time to file a detailed response in the matter. The impugned order is an order of transfer of the writ petitioner from Visakhapatnam and posting him to an Industrial unit at Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. Central industrial Security Force being a core Industrial Security Force, administrative orders like the impugned order should not be stopped from being given effect to, as it will cause great dislocation to the security concerns of Industrial houses. I, therefore, do not see any reason to stay the operation of the impugned order. However, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner is under occupation of a quarter at Visakhapatnam during his tenure of posting there. His son is prosecuting three year B.Sc. degree course and he is in the final year now and hence, the petitioner seeks to retain the quarter till such time his son completes the examinations. Until further orders, the writ petitioner may be permitted to continue to occupy the quarter under his occupation, notwithstanding his relief at Visakhapatnam. However, the writ petitioner shall be liable to pay the same amounts of licence fee/rent and other incidental expenses, if any, towards water and electricity consumption. The respondents shall not prevent in any matter the family members of the writ petitioner to continue to occupy the said quarter and shall not take measures such as disconnection of power supply or water or drainage connections.” From the above, it is obvious that administrative orders like the impugned order should not be stopped from being given effect to, but, however, the petitioner is permitted to retain the quarter until his son’s examinations are completed. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition can be disposed of making the interim order dated 04.08.2010 passed by this Court as the final order. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to retain the quarter till completion of examinations of the petitioner’s son. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 01.04.2011 LSK