THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR Writ Petition No.8911 of 2004 Date: 13.10.2011 Between: The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn. wing), I & CAD Department, Errum Manzil, Hyderabad, and 3 others .. Petitioners AND P. Samthuprakash Rao, Asst. Executive Engineer, Yellampalli Barrage Project Circle, Mancherial, Adilabad District. .. Respondent THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR Writ Petition No.8911 of 2004 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S. Rao) The writ petition is filed by the Engineer-in-Chief (Admn. Wing), Irrigation & Command Area Development (CAD) Department, Hyderabad and three others against the order dated 24.04.2003 in O.A.No.127 of 2003 of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal, for brevity). In the said order, the learned Tribunal while declining to interfere with the order dated 20.12.2002 transferring the respondent herein (hereafter, applicant) from Sircilla to Mancherial directed the petitioners herein (hereafter, the respondents) to allow the applicant to join at the place where he was transferred and further directed to regularize his services from the date of transfer till the date of rejoining the duty. The applicant is an Assistant Engineer in the Irrigation Department. As advised by the District Collector, Karimnagar, with regard to the alleged irregularities committed by the applicant, enquiry was initiated by the Commissioner of Enquiries. Pending such enquiry, by an order dated 20.12.2002, he was transferred from Sircilla to Mancherial so that the applicant will not tamper with the records. Assailing the transfer order, the applicant filed O.A.No.127 of 2003. The Tribunal passed interim orders on 10.01.2003 suspending the order of transfer and further directing the respondents to continue the applicant at Sircilla. The disciplinary enquiry went against the applicant. The charges were held proved. At that stage, transfer order was issued which was followed by an order imposing punishment of stoppage of two increments without cumulative effect. Taking into this consideration, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the petitioner was already punished for the irregularities and was allowed to join at the new place. In this writ petition, the only grievance made out by the respondents is that the applicant’s service from 20.12.2002 till the date of rejoining duty cannot be regularized. We are afraid that we cannot accept this submission. The applicant immediately assailed the order of transfer dated 20.12.2002, by that time he was meted with the punishment of stoppage of two increments, the interim order passed on 10.01.2003 by the Tribunal was in force and therefore, as rightly observed by the learned Tribunal that the applicant shall be deemed to be on duty. In that view of the matter, we do not find any error warranting interference. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) ___________________ (K.G. SHANKAR, J) 13.10.2011 Isn