IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 4762 of 2009 Between: A.Sreeramachandra Murthy S/o.Seetha Rama Swamy Nuzvid, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 3 The District Collector, Krishna District at Machilipatnam. 4 State of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, General Administration Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 5 M.S.Khasim Prakasam District. .....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 issue a Writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order of the Hon'ble A.P. Administrative Tribunal dated 4.3.2009 in O.A.No.3374 of 2009 and quash the same and also declare the G.O.Rt.No.290 dated 19.2.2009 as illegal, bad and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same and further direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as Revenue Divisional Officer, Nuzvid, Krishna District and to pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.R.MANOHAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No : 4762 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Ghulam Mohammed, J) This writ petition is filed challenging the order, dated 04.03.2009 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.3374 of 2009, whereunder the plea of the petitioner to suspend the G.O.Rt.No.290 dated 19.2.2009 was, rejected. 2. Brief facts, which are necessary for deciding the writ petition are that the writ petitioner is working as Revenue Divisional Officer, Nuzvid, Krishna District, and he is native of Akividu Village and Mandal of West Godavari District. While so, the Election Commission of India issued guidelines on 4.2.2009 regarding transfers and postings of officers in view of ensuing elections. According to the guidelines, if a person is posted to his native district or he has completed three years in that district during last four years or would be completing three years on or before 31.5.2009, he has to be transferred. The Government issued impugned G.O.Rt.No.290 dated 19.2.2009 transferring the petitioner in pursuance of the letter dated 17.2.2009 of the Election Commission of India. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the O.A. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he is not covered by the guidelines of the Election Commission of India as he is not working in his native district and he has not completed even one year service in Krishna District and therefore, he is not liable to be transferred as per guidelines of the Election Commission of India. 4. The official respondents filed a counter before the Tribunal stating that the transfer of the petitioner was necessitated on account of Election Commission’s instructions and his transfer was in conformity with the rules and further stated that the fifth respondent, who has completed three years service, is to be repatriated from Veligonda Project, Prakasam District and he was shifted and posted in place of the petitioner on administrative grounds. The fifth respondent also filed a counter stating that the transfer of the petitioner was effected on administrative grounds. 5. The Tribunal after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, dismissed the O.A. on 04.03.2009 holding that the transfer of the petitioner was made on Administrative grounds. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not covered by the guidelines issued by the Election Commission of India because neither the petitioner is native of Krishna District nor has he competed three years of service at Nuzvid, Krishna District. He also contends that there are no administrative grounds for transferring the petitioner from Nuzvid. 7. Learned Government Pleader for Services II submits that the transfer of the petitioner was made after obtaining the concurrence of the General Administration (Election) Department and therefore, the petitioner cannot challenge his transfer as it was made on the administrative grounds. 8. A perusal of the record would show that the fifth respondent has completed three years of service at Veligonda Project, Prakasam District and he was posted in the place of the petitioner on administrative grounds. The fifth respondent was deputed for election duty. The transfer of an employee is an incidence of service and no employee has vested right to continue in a particular place . The order of transfer is a part of the service conditions of an employee and should not be interfered with, unless the court finds that either the order is malafide or the service rules prohibit such transfer order. No ground has been made out by the petitioner. Therefore, we are of the view that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmities, so as to call for interference by this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 9. The writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J ________________ SANJAY KUMAR,J 06.03.2009 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}