THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.345 of 2010 ORDER: (Per GMJ) This writ petition is filed challenging the interim order dated 17.07.2009 passed in O.A.No.8139 of 2009 filed by the first respondent herein on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’), whereby the Tribunal directed the petitioners not to relieve the first respondent, pending admission; including further interim orders passed by the Tribunal directing compliance with the earlier orders. The case of the first respondent is that she was appointed as Lecturer on 25.03.1991 and at present working in Physics in Government Institute of Electronics, East Marredpally, Secunderabad, from 20.06.2007 onwards. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.169 dated 17.06.2009 lifting the ban on transfer from 17.06.2009 to 16.07.2009, whereby it was categorically stated that no person shall be transferred before completion of two years of service in a particular station as on 17.06.2009; that no person shall be retained beyond five years of service; that transfers shall be effected basing on counselling and that preference shall be given in the case of spouse categories. Husband of the first respondent is working as Deputy Director of Vigilance (South Zone) Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour, Government of India, Barkatpura, Hyderabad. However, the second petitioner issued proceedings dated 16.07.2009 transferring the first respondent from the present place to KDR Government Polytechnic College, Wanaparthy, Mahaboobnagar District, on the ground that she is a long-standing employee. Against the same, the first respondent filed the O.A. alleging that the transfer is made without conducting counselling and without considering the facts that of non-completion of service of two years, appointment of the first respondent in city cadre and spouse ground. As noted above, the Tribunal by impugned interim order directed the petitioners not to relieve the first respondent, pending admission. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. The case of the petitioners is that Government imposed general ban on transfer of employees. Every year, the Government lifts the ban on transfers for a limited period with conditions. Similarly orders were issued in G.O.Ms.No.169 dated 17.06.2009 lifting ban on transfers from 17.06.2009 to 16.07.2009 and separate guidelines for transfers and postings of employees in Government Polytechnics have been issued by the Government in G.O.Rt.No.493 dated 08.07.2009. In pursuance of the same, vide memo dated 23.06.2009, place of options have been called for from the employees seeking transfers. As per the Government orders, if any employee falls in the category to be transferred compulsorily fails to give option, such person would be posted to the left over vacancies in the counselling. The petitioner has been working at present station i.e., Hyderabad from 25.03.1991 and completed eighteen years as on 17.06.2009 and hence, she comes under the category of compulsory liability for transfer. She is at top among the long-standing employees in the City. She did not exercise place of option in spite of calling for options even from those who have completed five years stay at present station. Accepting the request of Sri S. Rama Rao, Lecturer in Physics working in Government Polytechnic for Women, Hindupur, for transfer in twin cities, the first respondent was transferred by proceedings dated 16.07.2009. On reporting of Rama Rao on 17.07.2009 afternoon, the first respondent was relieved of her duties at the present station i.e., Secunderabad, at that time itself. As noted above the first respondent filed the O.A. and the Tribunal passed impugned interim order dated 17.07.2009. The petitioners stated to have filed V.M.A.No.1909 of 2009 in the O.A. seeking to vacate the interim order dated 17.07.2009. While things stood thus, the first respondent filed C.A.No.674 of 2009 in the O.A. alleging disobedience of the interim orders passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal on 31.12.2009 and 06.01.2010 directed the petitioners to report compliance of the interim order interim order dated 17.07.2009 by 06.01.2010 and 19.01.2010 respectively. The petitioners, therefore, approached this Court. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the record, it is pertinent to note that since the O.A. is pending before the Tribunal and the rights of the parties are yet to be decided, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we are of the view that the discretion exercised by the Tribunal, while passing interim orders, does not warrant interference by this Court. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed and the interim order passed by this Court on 18.01.2010 in W.P.M.P.No.404 of 2010 stands vacated. However, the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the V.M.A.No.1909 of 2009 filed in the O.A. within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. _______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J 04th March, 2010 GHN