THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA W.P.No.11155 of 2010 and W.P.No.6220 of 2011 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Since these two writ petitions are filed by one and the same petitioner against the orders passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, one after the other, in fact under the same cause against the transfer, hence, they can be together taken up for disposal at the admission stage. 2. Heard Sri Gurram Srinivas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in both the writ petitions and the learned Government Pleader for Services and perused the material available on record. 3. Briefly, the facts, which gave rise to these proceedings, are that the petitioner, who has been working as Assistant Engineer with the respondents, claims that he has been working at the present place i.e. I.B. Sub Division, Hyderabad from 01.06.2007 onwards. Yet, he has faced with several transfers in the years 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2009 in all five years. The respondents effected transfer on administrative grounds as against the petitioner whereas his colleagues, who have been working for more than 10 to 15 years, are not affected. As a result, the petitioner is suffering mental agony and harassment. Yet, the respondents have chosen to transfer the petitioner as per the proceeding dated 07.07.2009 from Hyderabad to Sanga Reddy at Medak District. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed an application in O.A.No.8271 of 2009 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal and the same was dismissed on 27.04.2010. As against the same, the petitioner has filed the writ in W.P.No.11155 of 2010 and the same is being taken up along with other subsequent writ petition in W.P.No.6220 of 2011. While so, the appeal filed by the petitioner on 01.05.2010 to the first respondent was rejected by one line order dated 31.05.2010. Hence, the petitioner has filed another application before the Tribunal in O.A.No.3674 of 2010 and the same was also dismissed as per orders dated 10.08.2010. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. The main grounds urged on behalf of the petitioner is that he has been humiliated against the orders of the Tribunal causing lot of harassment by such reported acts for no offence of him and therefore the question of disturbing him, so frequently, is totally unreasonable and is bereft of any valid reason. 5. On both the occasions, the Tribunal had gone into the merits of the case and found that the orders of transfer are on Administrative side and nothing as such can be attributed nor there is any valid ground to set aside the same. We have given a due consideration to the submissions made by both sides in both the writ petitions and ultimately, the question arises for consideration is as to the correctness of the impugned transfer orders of the petitioner from Hyderabad to Sangareddy. 6. There is no dispute in regard to the aforesaid events, and the impugned proceedings are nothing but the orders of transfer. Nothing specifically has been pointed out by the petitioner as to whether the said transfer is mala fide or attributed to against any person nor can be said to be punitive much less the petitioner case as want of jurisdiction. In the absence of any basic grounds, especially when the finding is that the transfer is administrative one but not otherwise, this Court would not venture to come to different conclusions. Except reiterating what is stated before the Tribunal, nothing else nor any new point has been raised to have any effect on the validity of the orders of transfer. In the circumstances, we do not find any merits in both the writ petitions. 7. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________ (B.PRAKASH RAO,J) ____________​_____ (B.N. RAO NALLA,J) Date: -04-2011 sp THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA W.P.No.11155 of 2010 and W.P.No.6220 of 2011 Dated: -04-2011 sp