THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO.20294 OF 2008 % 17-09-2008 # Between: A.K.Mishra and others. … Petitioners And Union of India, Ministry of Defence Rep. by its Secretary, South Block, New Delhi and others. …. Respondents ! COUNSEL FOR THE PETITITIONERS: Mrs. Anita Swain ^ COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENTS: Mr. A.Rajashekar Reddy Asst. Solicitor General < Gist: > Head Note: ? CITATIONS: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 20294 of 2008 Between: 1 Sri A.K Mishra S/o. Prabhakar Mishra Reproduction Cell(printing Press) Building No.T/19A D.G.N.P Area,Visakhapatnam 2 K.A N.R Patanaik S/o. K.A N.Mohan Rao, 3 S.B Chakraborthy, S/o. LH Chakraborthy, 4 B.D Prasad S/o Jadunandan Prasad, 5 J.Kondaiah 1 to 4 are Reproduction Printing Cell,Visakhapatnam (2to 4 applicants are not necessary parties) ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Union of India Ministry of Defence rep.by its Secretary South Block, New Delhi 2 The Senior Administratvie Officer Manager Personnel Personnel Department Naval Dock, Yard Visakhapatnam District 3 The Admiral Superintendent Naval Dockyard Naval Base Visakhapatnam 4 The Flag Officer Commanding in Chief Eastern Naval Command Naval Base, Visakhapatnam .....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 to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ calling for the records pertaining to order dt 18-8-2008 in O.A No.420 of 2008 passed by the Centrarl Administrative Tribunal,Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad and quash the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MRS.ANITA SWAIN Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD Writ Petition No.20294 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking to quash the order dated 18-08-2008 passed in O.A.No.420 of 2008 on the ﬁle of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad, by virtue of which, the Tribunal refused to interfere with the transfer order issued by second respondent. 2. The petitioners – applicants have ﬁled the above O.A. challenging the transfer order dated 24-6-2008 issued by the second respondent and sought the following relief: “ To direct the respondents to call for the records pertaining to the order No.PES/0829/TRANSFER/RP CELL dated 24-06-2008 of the Senior Administrative Oﬃcer/Manager (personnel) the mass internal transfer order to the applicants from the Reproduction Cell to the Naval Dockyard’s diﬀerent branches without any sanctioned post there in the Naval Dockyard and quash the same by setting aside the order. Direct the respondents not to transfer the applicants from RPC(V) to the non-sanctioned post in Naval Dockyard without statutory order from the Chief of Naval Headquarter, New Delhi by declaring the action of the 2 nd respondent is arbitrary, illegal and violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.” 3. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned standing counsel appearing for respondents. Learned counsel for petitioners contended that the transfer order is passed by the authority, who does not have jurisdiction and that the petitioner is holding a technical post and the place to which he is transferred does not have any sanctioned post. 4. In the instant case, the transfer order is sought to be questioned and that too in respect of first petitioner only, as it is recorded by the Tribunal that all other petitioners have joined duty at the respective places pursuant to transfer orders. It is settled law that the transfer is an incidence of service and the court will not interfere with the transfer order. It is for the authority to transfer an employee to any place depending upon the exigency and the petitioner, being an employee, cannot have any grievance against the transfer order. It is not the case of petitioner that he is transferred to hold a post, which is lower in rank pursuant to the disciplinary proceedings. Apart from this, an employee is obligated to discharge the duties assigned to him by the employer, who in the instant case, is the Eastern Naval Command, which is involved in the safety and security of the country. The petitioner cannot claim to be retained at the place of his choice as a matter of right. In the circumstances, we do not see any infirmity, legal or otherwise, in the impugned order. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ________________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J. 17-09-2008 bsc