THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.No. 32606 of 2010 Date: 07.02.2011 Between : M.V.S.Prasasd Rao, S/o. Sivananda Rao … Petitioner And 1. The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, APEPDC Ltd., Visakhapatnam & 3 others. … Respondents ORDER: The writ petitioner is working as a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) in Chodavaram rural area. He submitted a representation seeking transfer to Visakhapatnam City for compelling circumstances, as his mother was critically ill, requiring medical attention on a regular basis and for the said purpose, he is required to stay in Visakhapatnam City. On the ground that the said representation has not been attended to so far and the writ petitioner’s request has not been conceded, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. Notice before admission was issued by this Court, returnable in six weeks, on 24.12.2010 and inspite of receipt of the said notice, there was no response filed by the respondents, nor was any one representing their cause. 3. Utilization of human resources in a manner considered appropriate is the prerogative of the employer, but, at the same time, a humane approach is called for to be deployed by the employer. If an employee is working in a rural area and he requires medical attention on regular and constant basis to one of his dear family members, such request can be termed only as a genuine request. Normally, every model employer will be conceding such requests on the part of the employees, as the employees will feel frustrated otherwise that by their very occupation, they are unable to attend to medical requirements of their family members and consequently, such employees will not be able to concentrate very effectively on the job on hand and they will not be able to contribute significantly to the productivity of the organisation. Therefore, the 1st respondent, the competent authority is directed to consider the request of the writ petitioner for a transfer from Chodavaram to any place in Visakhapatnam city and let it be decided within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The decision of the 1st respondent be promptly communicated to the writ petitioner. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J Dated: 07.02.2011 Note : Copy be made available to the learned counsel for the petitioner within three days. ksld/ysk HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.NO. 32606 OF 2010 7th day of February, 2011 KSLD/ysk