IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21370 of 2008 Between: Congregation of Cate chist of St.Ann Dept. of Education, St.Ann's Generalate, Rep by Superior General, Sr.Rose Linda @ Rosamma, D/o. Mr.Abraham, Aged 58 Years, H.No.12-13-485,Nagarjunanagar, Tarnaka, Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of A.P., Rep by its Principal Secretary, Education, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Director of School Education, State of A.P.,Nampally, Hyderabad. .....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 a WRIT, ORDER, more particularly one in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the in - action of the Respondents in considering and approving of Intra/district transfers of teachers working in diﬀerent schools under the management of Writ petitioner, as per its representation dated 16.04.2007, 09-08-2007, 11-02-2008, 27- 03-2008 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Article 30(1) of Constitution of India and contrary to the jurisdiction conferred upon the 2nd respondent and consequently direct the respondents to approve transfers of its staﬀ as per the proposal stated 16-04- 2007, 09-08-2007, 11-02-2008, 27-03-2008 a further direction to pay the salary its of transfer teachers with eﬀect from 01.06.2007 in the interest of justice and further be pleased to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.R.CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 21370 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been ﬁled by Congregation of Catechist of St. Ann/Department of Education assailing the action of the respondents in not considering the intra District transfer proposal of its teachers working in various schools under its management. 2 . The petitioner is ecclesiastical order society run by a minority community for the beneﬁt of Roman Catholic Christian and all other persons irrespective of religion, race, community, caste language. The petitioner runs various educational institutions apart from Hospitals, dispensaries and ‘Home for the aged’. The ﬁrst respondent issued G.O.Ms.No. 104 ( Education (G) Department), dated 30-1-1978 permitting the transfer of sister teachers belonging to ecclesiastical order from Educational Institution in one District to Educational Institution in another District with the approval of Joint Director of School Education. The second respondent also issued proceeding in Rc.No. 3267/G1/79, dated 29-2-1980 to all the District Educational Oﬃcers in the State to the eﬀect that they need not withhold the pay of individual teachers of the school who are transferred through aided management for want of approval authority. As usual, the petitioner transferred certain sister teachers working in the aided post in the schools under its management for the academic year 2007- 08 and submitted the proposals for approval to the 2nd respondent on 6-4-2007. The concerned District Educational Oﬃcers recommended transfers as sought for. In the meanwhile the 1st respondent issued Memo NO. 20533/PS- 1/A1/2005, dated 13-8-2007 rejecting the transfer proposals in respect of Sri E. Ramesh, Aided SGT of Vivekananda Vidya Samithi Model Practising School, Farooqnagar, Shadnagar mandal to aided M.B.U.P. School, Kalwakurthi, Mahaboobnagar District. According to the petitioner, the said Memo cannot be made applicable to the transfer proposal sent by it as by the date of Memo, the District Education Oﬃcer has recommended the transfer proposals to the 2nd respondent. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission, the Government Pleader for School Education received notice on behalf of the respondents. 4 . The factual aspect of the petitioner submittinga the representations to the 2nd respondent on various dates seeking approval of transfer is not in dispute. 5. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the representations dated 16-4-2007, 9-8-2007, 11-2-2008 and 27-3-2008 and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible preferably within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order as to costs. ______________________________ Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy 29th September, 2008. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 21370 OF 2008 29th September, 2008.