THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO :12984 of 2010 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.R. Balarami Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a direction by way of Mandamus declaring the action of the second respondent in not considering his representation, dated 17.05.2010 as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the second respondent to transfer the petitioner to Tirupathi or any other alternative place, namely, Chandragiri or Chittoor stations. It is stated that the petitioner is working as Upper Divisional Clerk in the office of A.P. Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, (APSPDCL) Nagari in Chittoor District, the first respondent herein. The main grievance of the petitioner is that as per the transfer guidelines issued by the first respondent, 30% to the cadre strength in each cadre need to be transferred for the year 2010-2011, but the respondents failed to do so. It is submitted that the cadre strength of UDC in the circle is 196, as such, the respondents have to transfer 56 employees from UDC cadre, but they have confined the transfers only to 48. It is further submitted that the petitioner has submitted a representation on 17.05.2010 seeking transfer to Tirupathi or any other alternative place, but the same has not been considered. Hence this writ petition. I have perused the transfer guidelines issued by the first respondent in Memo No.CMD/SPDCL/CGM(HRD)/DS/AS-I/PO (Adm)/D.No.789/10, dated 6.05.2010. Clause-8 of the guidelines specifies that transfers, as per the guidelines, have to be effected from the list drawn to the top incumbents, limited to 30% of the cadre strength of each cadre of the Unit. In view of the said guideline, it is not obligatory on the part of the first respondent/employer to effect transfers at 30% to the cadre strength. The fact that the transfers are to be limited to 30% of the cadre strength cannot be understood as an obligation on the part of the respondent to effect transfers at 30% of the cadre strength. In any event, the petitioner cannot choose the places for his posting on the ground that the said guideline is violated. However, it is stated that the petitioner has completed three years of service at the present station i.e., at Nagari in Chittoor District, and his representation dated 17.05.2010 is pending consideration. Whether the petitioner’s request can be considered or not is a matter to be considered by the respondents, but this Court cannot give any direction as prayed for, for transfer of the petitioner. However, in view of the pendency of the representation dated 17.05.2010 made by the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the second respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 17.05.2010 and communicate the same to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J.) 10th June, 2010 Js.