IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B. SUDERSHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21065 of 1994 Between: 1 M. Murali Krishna, S/o.Venkateswara Rao, aged 30 years, R/o Hyderabad and working as Work Inspector, A.P.S.H.C., Rangareddy District 2 L. Balavantha Reddy, S/o. Linga Reddy, aged about 30 years, R/o. Hyderabad, A.P.S.H.C., Rangareddy District. 3 G.Rajasekhar, S/o. Mangaiah, aged about 31 years, R/o. Hyderabad, A.P.S.H.C., Rangareddy District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Managing Director, A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited, A.P. Chambers of Panchayat Raj Buildings, Hyderabad, at Hyderguda. 2 The Executive Director/District Collector (H), A.P.State Housing Corporation Limited, Rangareddy District. 3 The District Manager, A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited, Rangareddy District at Lakdikapool. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents in issuing transfer order in No.A4/1289/92/RR, Dt.31/10/1994 in so far as it seeks to transfer petitioners herein from out of RR District is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and is therefore violative of Art.14 and 16 of Constitution of India and also declare that Rule - 9 of the Service Rules of the Housing Corporation Employees is illegal, arbitrary and further declare that the petitioners are entitled to be continued as Work Inspectors in Rangareddy District only. For the Petitioners: Mr. M.SURENDER RAO, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. V.C.H. Naidu, Standing Counsel. The Court made the following : It is stated by Sri V.C.H. Naidu, learned Standing Counsel for the A.P State Housing Corporation that the writ petitioners are retained at Ranga Reddy District in the posts in which they were holding as on the date of their transfer. In such view of the matter, no further directions as such are required to be issued in this writ petition. The Writ Petition is accordingly closed. No costs. (B. Sudershan Reddy, J) 29..07..2004 ks