IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 20624 of 2008 Between: M.Nallaguttaiah, S/o. M.P.Rangappa, Palamaneru, Municipality, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Engineer-in-Chief, Public Health, AC Guards, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Circle, Ananthapur, Ananthapur District. 3 The Palamaneru Municipality, Palamaneru, Chittoor District, rep by its Commissioner. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 an appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably one in the nature of Writ of certiorari, calling for the records relating to the order dated 10-9-2008 made in O.A.No.4917/2008 on the ﬁle of the A.P.Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad including the Proceedings of the 2nd respondent vide Roc.No.1300/Estt./ECI/2008-1, DATED 16- 06-2008 transferring the petitioner from Palamaneru Municipality in Chittoor District to Hindupur Municipality in Ananthapur District and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner at 3rd respondent Municipality as usual in the interest of justice and pass appropriate orders thereon. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.J.KANAKAIAH Counsel for the Respondent No.3: MR.S.I.NEWTON Counsel for Respondents 1 and 2 : GP for Services-II The Court made the following : ORDER :: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.20624 of 2008 ORDER : ( per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed ) This writ petition is ﬁled against order dated 10-9-2008 passed in OA No.4917 of 2008 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. 2. Facts stated are that the applicant- petitioner while working as Assistant Engineer in Adoni Municipality was transferred to Palamaneru Municipality vide proceedings dated 19-6-2006 passed by the 2nd respondent and accordingly the petitioner was relieved at Adoni Municipality on 23-8-2006 and joined in Palamaneru Municipality on 30-8-2006 as per the proceedings of the 3rd respondent, dated 30-8- 2006. It is stated that while matter stood thus, the petitioner was transferred from Palamaneru Municipality to Hindupur Municipality, Ananthapur District, by proceedings dated 16-6-2008 passed by the 2nd respondent. Questioning this order dated 16- 6-2008, the petitioner approached the Tribunal by way of ﬁling OA, being OA No.4917 of 2008. By the impugned order, the Tribunal dismissed the said OA on the ground that transfer of the petitioner was eﬀected on the ground of administrative exigency. Hence this writ petition by the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that the Tribunal initially granted interim suspension of the impugned transfer order, by order dated 8-7-2008 and when the petitioner sought to join in the place where in was working i.e. Palamaneru Municipality, he was not permitted to join and, therefore, the petitioner ﬁled contempt application before the Tribunal alleging violation of the order passed by the Tribunal, but by the impugned order the main OA itself was dismissed. Learned counsel further contended that the transfer order does not reﬂect any reasons justifying the transfer of the petitioner on administrative grounds and, therefore, it is liable to be quashed. 4. A perusal of the order dated 16-6-2008 passed by the 2nd respondent, it is evident that the transfer of the petitioner along with others had been eﬀected on administrative exigency. It is well settled proposition of law that transfer is an incidence of service and the petitioner cannot seek parity in matters of transfer, particularly when it is eﬀected on the ground of administrative exigency. The petitioner cannot assail the transfer eﬀected on administrative ground on the ground it is contrary to the guidelines issued in GO Ms.No.134, dated 9-5-2008. No material is pressed into service to show that the petitioner has been singled out and has been transferred without there being any exigency. 5. In the circumstances, we do ﬁnd any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. However, it is stated that the petitioner was not allowed to join the duty pursuant to the interim suspension granted by the Tribunal, the period during which he was out of duty be treated as on duty, for all purposes. 6. With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage itself. ______________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J ____________________ G. Bhavani Prasad, J Dated: 22nd September, 2008 Nrg. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{LS}