HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO. 829 OF 2011 Between: Dr. K. Ravinder Reddy ………….Appellant AND Dr. Y.S.R. Horticultural University Administrative Officer and three others ………….Respondents JUDGMENT : (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Appeal was preferred by the 4th respondent in the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition has been filed challenging an order of transfer passed by the first respondent- University. The writ petitioner who was working at the College of Horticulture, Rajendranagar was transferred to the College of Horticulture, Mojerla, where the appellant was working and the appellant was transferred and posted in place of the writ petitioner. It is contended by the writ petitioner that a condition has been stipulated in promoting the appellant that he shall work at College of Mojerla with a minimum period of three years and contrary thereto an order was passed on 2.9.2011 transferring him in place of the writ petitioner. It was not in dispute that the orders of transfer were passed at the request of the appellant herein. Therefore, the learned Single Judge has found that there is nothing on record to suggest even that the impugned order of transfer passed on administrative grounds and contrary thereto it is clear that the same was passed to accommodate the interest of the appellant herein. In those set of circumstances, the learned Single Judge felt that the writ petitioner should not have been penalized in the process of accommodating the appellant herein. We are conscious that normally in orders of transfer, the High Court would not be interfering in the matters, as it is purely a prerogative of the employer to transfer employees from one place to another. We are also conscious that transfer of an employee from one place to another is a pure incidence of service which is either required by the terms contained or stipulated in the contract of employment or the conditions of service framed by the employer. We are also conscious that the Supreme Court has observed in UNION OF INDIA VS. S.L. ABBAS[1] “6. An order of transfer is an incident of Government Service. Fundamental Rule 11 says that "the whole time of a Government servant is at the disposal of the Government which pays him and he may be employed in any manner required by proper authority". Fundamental Rule 15 says "the President may transfer a government servant from one post to another". That the respondent is liable to transfer anywhere in India is not in dispute. It is not the case of the respondent that the order of his transfer is vitiated by malafides on the part of the authority making the order, though the Tribunal does say so merely because certain guidelines issued by the Central Government are not followed, with which finding we shall deal later. The respondent attributed "mischief to his immediate superior who had nothing to do with his transfer. All he says is that he should not be transferred because his wife is working at Shillong, his children are studying there and also because his health had suffered a set-back some time ago. He relies upon certain executive instructions issued by the Government in that behalf. Those instructions are in the nature of guidelines. They do not have statutory force. 7. Who should be transferred where, is a matter for the appropriate authority to decide. Unless the order of transfer is vitiated by malafides or is made in violation of any statutory provisions, the Court cannot interfere with it. While ordering the transfer, there is no doubt, the authority must keep in mind the guidelines issued by the Government on the subject. Similarly if a person makes any representation with respect to his transfer, the appropriate authority must consider the same having regard to the exigencies of administration…” However, in the instant case, for the purpose of accommodating the appellant herein, the writ petitioner is sought to be disturbed. He has made out a case by pointing out that his wife who was working earlier at Mahaboobnagar District with the State Government had voluntarily opted for reversion and got transferred to Hyderabad District to take care of his ill health. In those set of circumstances, we find that the leaned Single Judge is justified in interfering with the order of transfer. We see no reasons to interfere with the order and accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. However, as and when next vacancy arises, the University may consider the case of the appellant for transfer. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _______________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J DATE: 30.11.2011 KA ... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies. [1] AIR 1993 SC 2444