V.Nagabhushanam S/O. Laxmi Rajam vs. The Andhra Pradesh Northern Power Distribution Company Ltd.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI

Writ Petition No.24897 of 2013

BETWEEN:

V. Nagabhushanam

…. PETITIONER

And

1. The Andhra Pradesh Northern Power Distribution Company Ltd., rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director, Warangal, Warangal District, and others.

…. RESPONDENTS

ORDER:

This writ petition has been filed questioning the order dated 19.08.2013 and 20.08.2013 transferring the petitioner from Karimnagar Rural (West) to C & O Sircilla-I.

2. The petitioner is a Line Inspector in the A.P. Northern Power Distribution Company Limited ( AP NPDCL). Initially in the counselling, he was transferred from Chenjerla to Karimnagar Rural (West) by order in Memo No.DEE/OP/KNR/JAO/ADM/SA/JA-1/D.NO.993, dated 15.05.2013 issued by the 3 rd respondent-Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation). He joined the new station on 29.05.2013.

3. It appears that the petitioner submitted a representation to the 1 st respondent on 17.06.2013 stating that it was difficult for him to work in the Karimnagar Rural (West) Sub-Division due to the vast area of operation as he is a physically challenged person, and wanted transfer to C & O Sub-Division, Sircilla. While the representation was pending, the 4 th respondent, who was working at C & O Sircilla, submitted a representation dated 19.08.2013 requesting the 1 st respondent to transfer him to Karimnagar Rural (West). The representation was forwarded to the 3 rd respondent for consideration on humanitarian grounds. Considering the request of the petitioner and the 4 th respondent for the transfers to Sircilla and Karimnagar Rural (West), the 3 rd respondent effected the transfers by order dated 20.08.2013.

4. Sri A. Satya Prasad, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order is not sustainable as lacking in bona fides. According to him, the petitioner sought for mutual

transfer along with the 4 th respondent and both of them submitted representation to the 1 st respondent on 26.05.2013. No action was taken on the said representation till 29.05.2013. Therefore, he was constrained to report to duty at Karimnagar Rural (West) station as per the transfer order dated 15.05.2013. Therefore, the mutual transfer application was no longer valid, and there is no justification for the 3 rd respondent in transferring the petitioner again to Sircilla after he has settled down. The counsel would further submit that the representation dated 26.05.2013 submitted by the petitioner was manipulated and pressed into service as if the same was submitted on a subsequent date. The learned counsel, therefore, would submit that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the petitioner should be retained at Karimnagar Rural (West).

5. On the other hand, respondents 1 to 3 would contend that the petitioner did not seek mutual transfer nor he submitted any representation on 26.05.2013. It is stated that only on 17.06.2013, he submitted the representation to transfer him to Sircilla Sub-Division. The representation was not considered immediately as there was no vacancy. In the meanwhile, the 4 th respondent came forward with a request to transfer him to Karimnagar Rural (West). Since the petitioner and the 4 th respondent were asking for transfers from their existing places, both of them were accommodated on humanitarian grounds.

6. The 4 th respondent has taken a similar stand in his counter.

7. I have considered the aforesaid contentions.

8. This Court while exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution does not interfere in transfer matters except on grounds of jurisdictional errors or mala fides. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner has not made out that the impugned order suffers either from lack of jurisdiction or mala fide.

9. The basis for the contention on behalf of the petitioner is the representation dated 26.05.2013. According to him, the said

representation was a joint representation and since it did not materialise, he joined the new station at Karimnagar Rural (West) on 29.05.2013, therefore, he ought not to have been disturbed from the said station. I am unable to accept the said contention. The copy of the representation placed before the Court shows that it was submitted on 17.06.2013, long after he joined at Karimnagar Rural (West) station on 29.05.2013. The representation further shows that he was unable to work there due to the vast area of operation as he is a physically challenged person. He does not dispute his signature on the representation. The material further shows that the transfers were not mutual transfers but they were effected on the representations separately filed by the petitioner and the 4 th respondent. The 03 rd Respondent, having considered both the representations, effected the transfers as desired by them in the light of the difficulties expressed by them, on humanitarian grounds. I am, therefore, of the considered view that the impugned order does not suffer from lack of bona fides, since it has been passed at the instance of the petitioner himself.

10. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Consequently, interim order granted on 26.08.2013 shall stand vacated and the W.P.M.P. and W.V.M.P are closed.

NOUSHAD ALI, J

_________________

27 th December, 2013 Js.