IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13177 of 2008 Between: Y.H.Lokapur S/o.Sh.Hanumappa Lokpur R/o.Q.No.3022-D, BHEL, R.C.Puram Medak District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 THE COMMANDANT, CISF,-BHEL,R.C.Puram Unit, Hyderabad,AP 2 The Inspector General (South Zone),Central Industrial Security Force, (Under Ministry of Home Affairs) Rajaji Bhavan,Beasant Magar,Chennai .....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 writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the impugned order dated 12.6.2008 bearing No.E-38014/CISF BHEL(R)/(30) Adm.I/2008 /3832 issued by the 1st respondent transferring the petitioner from CISF Unit, BHEL (R) R.C.Puram, Medak District to CISF Neyveli, Chennai, as illegal, and arbitrary, and consequently set aside the same to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon`ble court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MANDA ADAM Counsel for the Respondents: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is working as Constable in CISF and at present, he is posted in the unit at BHEL. Through order, dated 12.06.2008, the first respondent intimated the petitioner about his transfer to the unit at Neyveli. The petitioner challenges the same. It is contended that the petitioner submitted a complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., before the Court of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sanga Reddy, in relation to the withdrawal of a sum of Rs.30,000/-, from his ATM. He contends that, if he transferred to Neyveli, it will be difficult for him to pursue his case. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is not in dispute that the petitioner completed his normal tenure at the CISF unit, BHEL. The only ground on which the petitioner made challenge with regard to transfer to Neyveli is that an enquiry into the complaint submitted by him against the first respondent and the Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, is pending investigation. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents has placed before this Court a copy of final report filed into that case stating that investigation did not reveal anything and that the complaint be closed as undetectable. The petitioner is not able to state that any further steps were taken subsequent thereto. Further, in addition to filing a complaint, at the instance of the petitioner, Consumer Case No.37 of 2007 was taken up by the District Consumer Forum, Medak and the same was dismissed through order, dated 05.05.2008. It is represented that the petitioner refused to take the amount of Rs.30,000/-, which was found to have been wrongly withdrawn by another person. Be that as it may, pendency of cases wherein the employees figure as parties, cannot constitute a basis for retaining them at a particular station. In the instant case, even that eventuality does not arise, since no case, filed at the instance of the petitioner, is pending. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dated:24.06.2008 GJ