IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURALBE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.19320 of 2011 Between: Porika Karamchand … Petitioner and Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Warangal, Warangal District and others. … Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.19320 of 2011 ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed assailing the legality and the validity of the order dated 07.07.2011 passed in O.A. No.3827 of 2011 by the Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. Originally, O.A. No.3827 of 2011 was filed by the petitioner herein challenging the Proceedings dated 04.06.2011 of the 1st respondent, Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, wherein the 1st respondent had withdrawn the permission accorded to the petitioner to join duty vide earlier Proceedings dated 04.06.2011. The case of the petitioner is that he is working as Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Wardhannapet, Warangal District. The 2nd respondent, Deputy Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, vide proceedings dated 02.06.2011, transferred and posted the petitioner as Prohibition and Excise Inspector, E.S.T.F., Warangal unit in place of Sri Ch.Srinivas, Prohibition and Excise Inspector, who was transferred to Nelakondapalli, Khammam Unit, Khamma District. In furtherance of the orders of transfer, he got himself relieved vide Proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 03.06.2011 and he joined duty vide Proceedings dated 04.06.2011 as Prohibition and Excise Inspector, E.S.T.F, Warangal. Further more, said Ch.Srinivas was directed to handover the complete charge to the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner joined at new station and the orders of transfer stood worked out. While so, the 3rd respondent, Commissioner, Prohibition & Excise, vide Proceedings dated 04.06.2011 issued instructions requesting to stop effecting transfers to the post of Prohibition and Excise Inspectors immediately, and any orders issued by the authorities should not be implemented till further orders. This action of the 3rd respondent is totally without jurisdiction and therefore, the proceedings of stoppage of transfers issued by the respondents are not at all applicable to the case of the petitioner. On consideration of the said case, the Tribunal has said that since the Governmental authority has taken a decision in the public interest to stop effecting the transfers and postings in the particular zone, it cannot be said that the orders are without jurisdiction. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was transferred from Wardhannapet to E.S.T.F., Warangal on 02.06.2011 and thereafter, he reported and joined duty on 04.06.2011 but on the same day, issued proceedings withdrawing the permission already accorded to the petitioner to join duty. The said proceedings were challenged before the Tribunal with a request to issue directions to the respondents to continue the petitioner as Prohibition & Excise Inspector, E.S.T.F., Warangal and the Tribunal rejected the request of the petitioner. He also contended that since the petitioner has already been joined at the new station, the Government has no authority to pass order stopping the transfers and that too the Commissioner ought not to have passed the order and the same ought not to have made applicable to the petitioner. Further, it is also contended that no reasons have been assigned for not effecting the transfers. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the official respondents contended that the Government being the authority to pass any orders in the public interest, the respondents have passed the order not to effect the transfers. Therefore, there is no illegality in the order passed by the official respondents and the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material on record. Since the decision taken is a matter of policy decision, in public interest, we are not inclined to interfere with the same. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal and therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________________ JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED __________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 28.07.2011 LSK