IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. ASHOK KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 5832 of 2008 Between: K.Satyanarayana Rao S/o Krishnaswamy Rao O/o. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Kadapa R/o. Kadapa, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Guntur Region, Krishnanagar, Guntur, Guntur District. 2 The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Sub Regional Office, Kadapa, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an order or direction more particularly one Writ or direction or Writ of Certiorari (a) call for the records connected with and related to O.A.No.749 of 2007 dated 03rd March, 2008 passed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal and proceedings issued by the 1st respondent vide AP/RO/GNT/VIG 263/2007 in so far as posting the petitioner at Rajahmundry Sub Region and consequential proceedings No. AP/RO/GNT/VIG, 263/2007 dated 15.10.2007 in rejecting the request of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative principles of natural justice and contrary to the regulations in revoking the petitioner from suspension and transferring him from Kadapa to Rajahmundry and the same is liable to be set aside; (b) consequently direct the second respondent to continue the petitioner at Kadapa as Senior Social Security Assistant or at least in the area of Kadapa Sub Region and pass such other and further order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.R.N.REDDY (SC FOR EMPLOY'S PF ORG.) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI. JUSTICE S.ASHOK KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO :5832 of 2008 ORDER: (Per the Honourable Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal passed in O.A.No:749 of 2007, dated 3.3.2008. The petitioner is the applicant and he has filed the present O.A. seeking to declare the proceedings dated 11.10.2007 vide No:AP/RO/GNT/VIG 263/2007 and the consequential proceedings No:AP/RO/GNT/VIG.263/2007, dated 15.10.2007 of the 1st respondent in rejecting the representation of the applicant without assigning any reason as illegal and set aside the same with a direction to the 1st respondent to retain the applicant in Kadapa. The tribunal having observed that an interim order has been passed directing the respondents to maintain statusquo as on 31.10.2007 and as on that day, the applicant was under suspension and the said suspension was revoked and transferred under the impugned orders and that the applicant did not comply with the impugned orders and he remained at Kadapa without joining at the place to which he is posted and had he been joined at Rajahmundry, the revocation of suspension would have come into being and that the applicant instead of joining at the station to which he is posted, approached this Tribunal challenging the impugned order and obtained status quo order and therefore, it shall be deemed that the applicant continues to be under suspension till he reports for duty at Rajahmundry, dismissed the O.A., and directed the applicant to join at the new station within 15 days from that day and the respondents to treat the period from 31.10.2007 as a suspension period and pay necessary subsistence allowance till the date of the applicant reports at Rajahmundry. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the material available on record. On a perusal of the material on record and the order impugned goes to show that it is the apprehension of the applicant that one of the officers, who gave statements against him during the preliminary enquiry, is the officer under whom he has to work at Rajahmundry and therefore, his career would be spoiled. Merely the officer has been cited as the witnesses in the departmental inquiry, it cannot be said that he has got any prejudice against the applicant as rightly observed by the Tribunal. In this view of the matter and in view of the omnibus allegations attributed against the authorities, We have no hesitation to hold that the order of the tribunal needs no interference. At this stage, while submitting that the petitioner has already joined at Rajahmundry, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty of this Court enabling the petitioner to make a representation to the authorities to consider his claim. In the circumstances of the case, liberty is granted to the petitioner enabling him to submit appropriate representation to the authorities. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ___________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ___________________ Justice S.Ashok Kumar Dated:21.4.2008 Gurc/nn THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI. JUSTICE S.ASHOK KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO :5832 of 2008 (Division Bench Order delivered by Honourable Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) 21/04/2008 ,