THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.17110 of 2007 Date 10-8-2007 Between: G.Sreenivasulu ……… PETITIONER AND The Engineer-in-Chief (Administration Wing), I&CAD Department, Erram Manzil, Hyderabad and others. ……..RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.17110 of 2007 ORDER: (per Smt. T.Meena Kumari,J) The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings No.RC/ENC/45450-4/2007-2, dated 30.5.2007 issued by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and to set aside the same. He also sought for a consequential direction to set aside the order of the Tribunal passed in O.A. No.3005 of 2007, dated 4.6.2007. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner herein is working as Deputy Executive Engineer. While so, the Government issued G.O. Ms. No.100, dated 1.5.2007 lifting the ban on transfers with certain conditions. In the said G.O., it was also mentioned that all transfers should be effected basing on counselling; that no person shall be transferred before completion of two years and no person shall be retained beyond five years. Petitioner alleges that even though he has not worked for more than two years in the present place as Deputy Executive Engineer, basing on the particulars given by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent through the impugned proceedings dated 30.5.2007 transferred the petitioner. Assailing the same, the respondent filed O.A. No. 3005 of 2007 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the impugned order in the O.A., on 4.6.2007 issued notice before admission. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Tribunal by the impugned order only issued notice before admission and it did not grant any interim order. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Admittedly, the Tribunal through the impugned order, only issued notice before admission and it did not pass any final order in the O.A. Since the impugned order is only an interlocutory order, we do not find any valid ground to entertain this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India . However, we direct the Tribunal to dispose of the main O.A. itself, namely, O.A. No. 3005 of 2007, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ___________________ T. MEENA KUMARI,J DATE: 10th August, 2007 __________________ G. CHANDRAIAH,J pnb