IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 20404 of 2008 Between: D. Sathaiah ..... PETITIONER AND Inspector General (SS) of Central Industrial Security Force, South Zone, Head Quarters, Besant Nagar, Chennai and another. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.SHIVA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS} HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.20404 of 2008 ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, this writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties. 2. The 2nd respondent issued proceedings dated 11-06-2008, whereby the petitioner, who is a CISF Constable, is transferred from B.D.L, Bhanur, Medak District, to Neyveli Corporation (NLC), Neyveli, Tamilnadu. By order dated 18-09-2008, this Court suspended the said order with liberty to the respondents to transfer the petitioner in and around Hyderabad city. 3. At the hearing, Sri B. Shiva Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner was seriously injured while in duty and according to the recommendations of the Medical Board, he is fit for sedentary duties only. The learned counsel further submitted that his transfer to N.L.C., Neyveli, Tamilnadu, will disturb his domestic life as the petitioner’s children are studying in Hyderabad. 4. In the counter affidavit, it is inter alia mentioned that the representation dated 22-07-2008, filed by the petitioner, was considered and the same was rejected on the ground that NLC, Neyveli, Tamilnadu, the place where the petitioner was transferred, is having good medical and education facilities and that many persons, who are similarly situated, are posted at that place and serving there without any difficulties. 5. In my considered view, transfer is an essential condition of service and so long as the petitioner is in services, he cannot resist such transfer. The disability of hearing defect incurred by the petitioner and his inability to attend to duties other than the sedentary duties cannot be pressed into service as a ground to question his transfer orders. Neyveli being close to Chennai has got medical and educational facilities and the respondents were satisfied that the petitioner does not suffer any disadvantage on account of his transfer to the said place. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order of transfer. 6. However, having regard to the Medical Board’s Report, the respondents shall assign duties to the petitioner, which suit his health condition. The petitioner is permitted to join duty at the transfered place on or before 01-06-2009. 7. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J KVR