HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 22323,22440 & 22458 of 2009 Date: 13.11.2009 W.P.No.22323 of 2009 Between: P.Ramanjaneya Reddy … Petitioner And The A.P. State Housing Corporation Ltd., Hyderabad. … Respondents HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 22323, 22440 & 22458 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: The petitioners in all these writ petitions are working as Assistant Engineers in the A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited. These writ petitions are filed seeking a declaration that the circular dated 16.10.2009 issued by the 1st respondent proposing to hold counseling to effect transfers of the Assistant Engineers/Deputy Executive Engineers from their native Sub-Division/Division is arbitrary and illegal. As could be seen from the impugned circular dated 16.10.2009, the Government vide G.O.Rt.No.224 dated 15.10.2009 permitted the Managing Director of the A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited to effect the transfers of longstanding Assistant Engineers/Deputy Executive Engineers from their native Sub-Division/Division respectively following the instructions specified therein. Accordingly, the 1st respondent proposed to conduct counseling on 20.10.2009 to the Assistant Engineers/Deputy Executive Engineers whose names are mentioned in the annexure to the said circular. The said circular is challenged in these writ petitions primarily on the ground that the proposed transfers in the middle of the academic year is arbitrary and illegal. It is also contended that the impugned action of the respondents in seeking to transfer the petitioners while retaining many seniors in the same places is unwarranted and unjustified. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent- Corporation, it is stated that restructuring of staff of A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited has been found to be essential in the field levels for efficient implementation of Indiramma Housing Programme. Accordingly, the respondent-Corporation submitted necessary proposals to the Government for creation of additional posts in all cadres including Deputy Executive Engineers/Assistant Engineers/Work Inspectors/Draughtsman at the Mandal level/Municipality. The Government, vide G.O.Ms.No.144 dated 03.06.2008 created 2080 posts in various categories in the Corporation for implementation of Indiramma Housing Programme purely on temporary basis for a period of two years or till completion of the programme. Thereafter, during the review meeting on Indiramma Houses, held on 02.08.2009, a decision was taken by the Chief Minister to shift all the longstanding field level persons like Assistant Engineers and Deputy Executive Engineers from their native Sub- Division/Division respectively. The said decision was communicated to the Corporation vide letter dated 10.08.2009 and the Corporation was directed to examine the issue and requested to send necessary proposals to Government for according permission to effect the transfers. In compliance with the same, the Corporation sent the proposals on 11.08.2009 and the permission was granted vide G.O.Rt.No.224 dated 15.10.2009 specifying the criteria/method to be followed. As per the said criteria, the Assistant Engineers, who are working in their native Sub- Divisions or in any place for more than 5 years, in all cadres put together, should be transferred compulsorily by taking their option for going to new place. Accordingly, it was decided by the Corporation to transfer longstanding Assistant Engineers/Deputy Executive Engineers working in their native places for more than 5 years and pursuant thereto the impugned circular was issued. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. It is not in dispute that all the petitioners herein have completed 5 years of service in their respective Sub-Divisions. Thus, the impugned proposal to transfer the petitioners is in accordance with the criteria mentioned in G.O.Rt.No.224 dated 15.10.2009. It is also clear from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Corporation that the circular dated 16.10.2009 has been issued in terms of the decision taken by the Government to transfer the longstanding field level persons for effective implementation of Indiramma Housing Programme. Such a decision taken by the respondents for implementation of a welfare scheme cannot be held to be arbitrary or illegal on any ground whatsoever. The law is well settled that the transfer of an employee is only an incident inherent in the terms of appointment and such an order warrants no interference unless it is shown to be an outcome of a mala fide exercise of power or violative of any statutory provision or where the order is found to be without jurisdiction. As expressed above, the impugned decision taken by the respondents to effect the transfers under the circular dated 16.10.2009 is not in violation of any statutory provision and absolutely no allegation of mala fides is made in the writ petition. Even the contention that the respondent-Corporation is estopped from effecting the transfers in the middle of the academic year could not be supported by any statutory provision except stating that it would result in dislocation to the families of the petitioners. Even assuming that the petitioners and their family members are put to some inconvenience, in my considered opinion, the same cannot be a valid ground to interdict the proceedings pursuant to the circular dated 16.10.2009. In this context, it is relevant to refer to the observations made by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. and others v. Gobardhan lal[1] as under: “A challenge to an order of transfer should normally be eschewed and should not be countenanced by the courts or tribunals as though they are Appellate Authorities over such orders, which could assess the niceties of the administrative needs and requirements of the situation concerned. This is for the reason that courts or tribunals cannot substitute their own decisions in the matter of transfer for that of competent authorities of the State and even allegations of mala fides when made must be such as to inspire confidence in the court or are based on concrete materials and ought not to be entertained on the mere making of it or on consideration borne out of conjectures or surmises and except for strong and convincing reasons, no interference could ordinarily be made with an order of transfer.” For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions are devoid of any merit and the same are accordingly dismissed. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J. Date: 13.11.2009 KLP [1] (2004) 11 SCC 402