IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 22 of 2008 Between: Dr.S.Venkata Ratnam, S/o.Venkatesham, C.H.C.Bhimavaram,W.G Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Director of Health,Government of A.P, Hyderabad at Koti 2 The Government of A.P, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Health Medical and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat,Hyderabad 3 The Commissioner A.P, Vaidya Vidhana Parishad,Hyderabad at Koti .....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 an order or writ more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus by declaring the Docket Proceedings passed on 24-12-2007 in OA.No.7715/2007 on the file of the A.P.Administrative Tribunal,Hyderabad in not granting the interim orders in OA No.7715/2007 and also proceedings of the 1st respondent bearing Rc.No.36047/EIC/2006. Dt.1-12-2007 as illegal arbitrary,unjust and in violation of Article 14 of the constitution of India and set aside the same and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.RANGANADH RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH & FAMI.WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP for Services-II The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.22 of 2008 ORDER: (per Smt. T.Meena Kumari,J) The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the order of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, made in O.A. No. 7715 of 2007, dated 24.12.2007, whereby and whreunder the Tribunal declined to grant interim orders. The facts in brief are that the petitioner herein is working as a Deputy Civil Surgeon at Community Health Centre, Bhimavaram, West District. While so, the 1st respondent through the impugned proceedings dated 1.12.2007, transferred the petitioner to UPHC, Kurupam, Vizianagaram District. Assailing the same, he filed O.A. No. 7715 of 2007 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, through order dated 24.12.2007, while admitting the O.A. issued notice. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is a heart patient and has undergone angioplasty twice. He further submits that the place to which the petitioner is transferred is 400 kms. away from Bhimavaram, which is an agency area and the petitioner being a heart patient needs constant medical care. That apart, petitioner’s wife is also a Civil Surgeon. In such circumstances, the Tribunal ought to have stayed the impugned order. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents supported the impugned order. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Medical & Health for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing on behalf of Respondent No.3. Admittedly, the Tribunal, through the impugned order only ordered notice in the main O.A. and it did not pass any final orders. In the circumstances, we do not find any valid ground to entertain this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ___________________ T. MEENA KUMARI,J DATE: 3rd March, 2008 __________________ G. CHANDRAIAH,J pnb