THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 17071 of 2010 Dated: 10-8-2010 Between: The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Health, Medical and Family Welfare Department, A.P.Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …Petitioners and Dr. Kalpana Subramanyam and others …Respondents ORAL ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-I for the petitioners. The writ petition is directed against the order of the learned A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’) dated 28- 4-2010 in O.A.No. 1824 of 2010 whereby the application of the 1st respondent herein was allowed and the order of the State Government (writ petitioners) in G.O.Rt.No. 367, Health, Medical and Family Welfare (A.1) Department, dated 18-3-2010 transferring the 1st respondent as Professor of Bio-Chemistry, Rangaraya Medical College, Kakinada and bringing the 2nd respondent, the Professor of Bio-Chemistry, Rangaraya Medical College, Kakinada to the Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam, was quashed. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the 1st respondent who was working as a Professor in the Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam challenged the order in G.O.Rt.No. 367, dated 18-3-2010 transferring her to Rangaraya Medical College, Kakinada and bringing the 2nd respondent in her place on expiry of his medical leave while the said individual was substantively posted to Rangaraya Medical College, Kakinada. The order of transfer was challenged on the ground that it was for extraneous reasons, to accommodate the 2nd respondent herein. The Tribunal called for the relevant records and found that the 2nd respondent herein was initially transferred from Visakhapatnam to Kakinada in G.O.Rt.No. 921, Health, Medical and Family Welfare (A1) Department, dated 16-7-2009 on the ground that he had longstanding service at Visakhapatnam. By the same proceedings one Dr. D.S.S.Girija Vani was posted as Professor of Bio-Chemistry at Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam. The 2nd respondent however does not appear to have joined at Kakinada, as he appears to have suffered an injury in an accident and applied for sick leave on 21-7-2009 shortly after his transfer to Kakinada. The 2nd respondent made several representations for reposting at Visakhapatnam. It would also appear from the record that the former Minister for Commercial Taxes had recommended the case of the 2nd respondent for reposting at Visakhapatnam. The matter was considered at the level of the Honourable Chief Minister in August, 2009 and the request and recommendation was not acceded to. Again the former Minister recommended to the Honourable Minister for Medical Education in October, 2009 the case of the 2nd respondent for reposting at Visakhapatnam. The Principal Secretary and Joint Secretary concerned examined the case of the 2nd respondent and directed his reposting only at Kakinada. This was approved by the Honourable Minister concerned and the Honourable Chief Minister as well, in January, 2010. Thereafter there was another note circulated from the office of the Honourable Chief Minister expressing that the 1st respondent should be posted to Kakinada and the 2nd respondent to Visakhapatnam. However, the Honourable Chief Minister does not appear to have pressed this initial proposal. Thereafter another recommendation was made by the former Minister seeking the reposting of the 2nd respondent to Visakhapatnam. This was eventually recommended by the Honourable Minister concerned and such recommendation also accepted by the Honourable Chief Minister eventually and thus the order in G.O.Rt.No. 367 dated 18-3-2010 was issued, which was impugned before the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal carefully and critically considered the chronology of events and the successive interferences and recommendations made by political personages in the matter of posting of members of a professional service i.e., in this case a Professor of Bio-Chemistry. The Tribunal also considered the fact that there was no rational reason for the persistent efforts to accommodate the 2nd respondent at Visakhapatnam and disturb the 1st respondent from there; that the claim of the 2nd respondent (that he was a Co- Principal Investigator in the Consortium Project of Anthropological Survey of India (2009-2010), a multi disciplinary multinational engaged in the study of diabetes in GAVARA community of Andhra Pradesh in the Visakhapatnam, Anakapalle regions and that this function can be conveniently handled only from Visakhapatnam) was a claim without a rational basis, as another Co-Principal Investigator one Dr. K.A.V.Subrahmanyam also in the Consortium Project of Anthropological Survey of India was transferred to Gandhi Medical College, Secunderabad and was working from there and continued the association with the Project without any adverse impact on the functions associate with the Consortium. The Tribunal inferred that the claim of functional convenience in operating from Visakhapatnam was a mere fig leaf to accommodate the 2nd respondent at Visakhapatnam. On the basis of the inferences drawn from the chain of circumstances and the succession of political interjections favouring the 2nd respondent’s reposting at Visakhapatnam, the Tribunal legitimately inferred extraneous consideration as vitiating an administrative decision to transfer the 1st respondent to Kakinada to accommodate the 2nd respondent at Visakhapatnam. We find no perversity in the reasoning or the analysis of the material on record by the learned Tribunal, warranting interference in judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution. There are no merits. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. _________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J _________________________ B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J 10th August, 2010. GRR