FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WRIT PETITION NO. 3622 OF 2011 CHUDAMAN DODHU JADHAV VERSUS THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS ... Advocate for Petitioner : Shri Chavan P.P. AGP for Respondent(s) 1 : Shri Suryavanshi K.M. Advocate for Respondent(s) 2 to 4 : Shri Shelke A.S. ... CORAM : D B BHOSALE & S B DESHMUKH, JJ. Dated: August 04, 2011 ... 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner is challenging his transfer from Chalisgaon division to Ahmednagar circle office being illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Circular dated 5.4.2011 issued by the Executive Director (HR), MSEDCL, Mumbai. 3. The petitioner is due for retirement on 31.5.2013 and his transfer was effected on 4.5.2011. He was posted at Chalisgaon as Executive Engineer on 12.9.2007. It is against this backdrop, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that transfer of the petitioner is in violation of Circular dated 5.4.2011, which provide that the transfer cannot be effected of the persons who are due for retirement within two years. We have perused the circular. It simply states that while effecting transfer the employees who are due for retirement by May 2013 be considered sympathetically. 4. In paragraph No.8 of the reply affidavit filed by respondents 2 to 4, it is specifically stated that the petitioner's transfer was effected in view of his poor performance as Executive Engineer, Chalisgaon division. It is further stated that as per the Executive FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS (2) WRIT PETITION NO. 3622 OF 2011 Director (Commerce and I.T. Report), the energy losses of Chalisgaon division increased by 3.5. per cent which is highest increase in any division in Maharashtra The energy losses for the year 2009-10 were 21.77 per cent and in 2010-11 were 25.27 per cent. In view thereof, they have effected transfer of the petitioner. 5. The petitioner has been transferred from taluka place to district headquarter. The petitioner has stated in the petition that he is a heart patient and has undergone open heart surgery in January 2002. In view thereof, Shri Shelke, learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4 submitted that, he has been transferred to district head quarter. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the chart annexed to his rejoinder to show that there is a discrimination in transfer orders made on the ground of losses. It is not possible for this Court to go into all this in Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. That apart, it appears that the petitioner has already been relieved and some other person has taken charge at Chalisgaon. 7. Record shows that the petition was filed on 9.5.2011. It was heard by the learned Vacation Judge on 10.5.2011 and interim relief in terms of prayer clause "E" was granted on that day. A statement has been made on oath in reply affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 2 to 4 that writ of the said stay order was served upon them on 12.5.2011. However, on 9.5.2011 itself, the petitioner was relieved from his post at FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS Chalisgaon. There is no reason to dis-believe the (3) WRIT PETITION NO. 3622 OF 2011 statement made on oath by the affiant on behalf of respondents 2 to 4. 8. In the circumstances, in our opinion, the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Sheshrao Nagorao Umap Vs. State of Maharahstra [ Bom. C.R. 1 (1985) 30 ] will not apply to the case on hand since we do not find violation being committed by respondents 2 to 4 while effecting transfer of the petitioner and/or discrimination as alleged. 9. In the result, Writ Petition stands dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. ( S B DESHMUKH, J. ) ( D B BHOSALE, J. ) akl