THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 32625 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings dated 25.11.2011 issued by the 1st respondent, transferring the petitioner from A.P. Social Welfare Residential School-cum-Junior College, Mahabubnagar to A.P. Social Welfare Residential Junior College, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order has been issued under the guise of an order passed by this Court in W.P.No.24447 of 2011 dated 11.10.2011. The counsel would further submit that the writ petition No.24447 of 2011 was filed by certain employees questioning the transfer orders, seeking for issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the 1st respondent in not issuing transfer orders of the petitioners in pursuance of the 1st respondent’s circular in Rc.No.G-1/6512/2011 dated 06.06.2011 issued in lieu of G.O.Rt.No.455 Social Welfare (RS.1) Department dated 04.06.2011 of the 2nd respondent, who acted in pursuance of the 3rd respondent’s G.O.M.S.No.93 Finance (DCM-III) dated 14.05.2011 is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice. This Court, by order dated 11.12.2011, disposed of the matter as under:- “Therefore the writ petition is allowed and the 1st respondent is directed to issue order of transfer in accordance with the counseling that has taken place on 14.06.2011 for the employees working in the institutions in Zone-VI within a period of three (3) weeks from today. In case, any formalities are to be completed for the left over posts, in the same zone, it shall be open to the 1st respondent to undertake the same within the period stipulated. There shall be no order as to costs.” The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has not participated in the counseling that has taken place on 14.06.2011 and therefore, the petitioner is not given an opportunity of choosing his choice of place. The counsel further submits that consequent to the impugned proceedings in the writ petition, the petitioner submitted representation dated 03.11.2011 and the matter is pending on the file of the 1st respondent. If the impugned proceedings will be allowed to give effect, the petitioner will be put to greater inconvenience that the petitioner had already worked for a period from 2000-05 at the place to which the petitioner now posted under the impugned order. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent- society submits that, consequent to the disposal of the writ petition W.P.No.24447 of 2011, the left over other employees formalities have been completed subsequent to the counseling dated 14.06.2011, and then only the impugned proceedings have been issued. However, he submits that the petitioner is on leave as on today, and she made a representation dated 03.12.2011, immediately to the 1st respondent. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, taking note of the fact that the petitioner, as on today, is on leave and therefore, the petitioner would not be put to any inconvenience. Under the above facts and circumstances of the case, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the representation dated 03.12.2011 submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the impugned proceedings dated 25.11.2011, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH 12th December, 2011 Note: C.C by tomorrow KSM