1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.353/2011 [Vinayak Vasudev Inamdar .vrs. The Additional Director General of Police, CID] ................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................................... CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND P.D. KODE, JJ. DATE : JULY 21, 2011. Heard Shri S.P. Palshikar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri S.J. Jichkar, learned AGP for the respondent. The petitioner had questioned his transfer from Pune to Nagpur before Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (hereafter referred to as ‘MAT). The MAT has, vide order dated 16.11.2009, refused to interfere, but then permitted him to move his employer for seeking placement at Pune and the employer was directed to immediately consider his application, if received. Accordingly, the request was made and it has been rejected on 24.9.2010. The petitioner has been informed that there are 116 vacancies on the establishment and it was not even 2 possible to undertake routine transfers. Advocate Shri Palshikar, in this background, invites attention to the reasons disclosed before MAT and refusal as communicated to the petitioner, to urge that it shows non application of mind. Learned AGP justified the action by pointing out that as there are 116 vacancies, the persons cannot be shifted out of Nagpur. He has relied upon the reply filed by the Additional Director General of Police, CID, Nagpur before this Court to substantiate his stand. During argument, Advocate Shri Palshikar, has pointed out that the petitioner came to Pune only in 2007 and, thereafter, he was transferred out of Pune. He further contends that there are several officers who have completed more than 20 years at Pune only. We do not wish to interfere in internal affairs of the respondent. However, merely because there are 116 vacancies, it cannot be visualized that routine transfer cannot be undertaken. The reasons therefore cannot be accepted. In this situation, we permit the petitioner to move once again his employer with appropriate application. If such application is made, the same shall be looked into in accordance with the law by the 3 concerned authority within a period of three months from today. The said consideration shall be uninfluenced by earlier rejection of the petitioner’s application and any observations either by MAT or by other Court. JUDGE JUDGE Gulande