THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR W.P.No.23137 of 2010 Date: 15.03.2011 Between: Sri G. Lakshmi Naidu .. Petitioner AND The Superintending Engineer, Irrigation& CAD Department, Irrigation Circle, Bobbili, Vizianagaram District and 3 others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR W.P.No.23137 of 2010 ORDER (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed): The writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus to declare the impugned proceedings No.111M/AB/ EC1, dated 30.08.2010 passed by the first respondent-Superintending Engineer, Irrigation & CAD Department, Bobbili, Vizianagaram District and also the order dated 13.09.2010 passed in O.A.No.5806 of 2010, dated 13.09.2010 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, as illegal and arbitrary and to set aside the same. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner, who is applicant in O.A.No.5806 of 2010, is working as Senior Assistant in the office of the Executive Engineer, I & CAD, VKMNJRP Division, Chakali Belagam Pravathipuram, Vizianagaram District. Through the proceedings dated 30.08.2010, the first respondent transferred the petitioner from VKMNJRP Division, Parvathipuram to SMI Division Office, Seetampeta. It is the further case of the petitioner that earlier he filed O.A.No.3081 of 2010 in similar situation and the Tribunal directed him to make a representation before the authorities concerned and till then directed to maintain status quo as on 12.05.2010. However, he was transferred to VKMNJRP Division, Parvathipurm in the existing vacancy and he joined there on 17.05.2010. Now, the respondents are again subjecting him to transfer to SMI Division, Seetampeta and therefore, the action of the respondents is highly illegal and arbitrary. Aggrieved by the same, he filed the present O.A.No.5806 of 2010 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. 3. After considering the matter in detail, the A.P. Administrative Tribunal dismissed the said O.A., rejecting the prayer of the petitioner, through order dated 13.09.2010. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel on both sides. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that since the registration of disproportionate assets case in the year 2008 has no relevance to the present case, through the impugned order of the first respondent, dated 30.08.2010, the petitioner could not have been transferred. He further submitted that the Government has issued instructions in Memo No.541/ Serv.Wel/A1/94-1, dated 15.09.1994 that the employees, who are holding the post at Taluk and District level in APNGOs Association, should not be transferred. Therefore, as per the said instructions, the petitioner being the President of APNGO’s Association, Parvathipuram Taluk Unit and also Vice-President of District Branch, Vizianagaram, should not be transferred. Hence, he prayed to set aside the impugned orders by continuing him as Senior Assistant at VKMNJRP Division, Chakali Belagam, Parvathipuram Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 6. Per contra, the Government Pleader for Services-II appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that as per the directions of the Government in line with the recommendation of CB- CID, ACB and the advice of A.P. Vigilance Commission pending investigation of the disproportionate assets case registered against him, the petitioner was transferred from Parvathipuram to Seethampeta. He further submitted that the investigation of the disproportionate assets case against the petitioner has not yet been completed. He further submitted that in furtherance of the orders passed by the Tribunal earlier, the Government has passed a speaking order. The petitioner without challenging the said speaking order has chosen to challenge the consequential orders, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. A perusal of the order dated 13.09.2010 passed in OA No.5806 of 2010 goes to show that the impugned orders have been issued in public interest. The reasons stated by the Government in Memo, dated 02.06.2010 are well founded. Further more, a well considered order is passed by duly taking into consideration the advice of the vigilance commission. The main object of transferring the applicant to the present place of posting is to see that smooth conducting of investigation into the disproportionate assets case pending against him. In the opinion of the Tribunal, the prayer sought for by the petitioner cannot be conceded to by the Tribunal. 8. In service of every employee, transfer is obvious. The Government, after taking into the facts and circumstances for smooth functioning of the office, will transfer the employees from time to time and has got power to transfer the employees as per rules. Therefore, the employees cannot ask for retention at the same place for ever. The Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that the main object of transferring the applicant to the present place of posting is for smooth conducting of investigation into the disproportionate assets case pending against him and such investigation has not yet been completed. 9. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.5806 of 2010 dated 13.09.2010 as well as the order of the first respondent dated 30.08.2010 and they do not call for any interference of this Court. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is directed to make a representation to the respondents and on filing of such representation, the authorities concerned are directed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within two weeks from the date of filing of such representation. No order as to costs. __________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J ________________ K.G. Shankar, J Date: 15.03.2011 Note: Issue CC in one week. (B/o.) Isn