WP/42785/2015 of K. Rani Vs The District Collector, Eluru West Godavari District on 31 December 2015

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAHAND

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA

WRIT PETITION No. 42785 of 2015

ORDER:(per Hon’ble Sri Justice G. Chandraiah)

In this writ petition, orders dated 17.11.2015 in O.A.No.3747 of2013 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, arechallenged. The petitioner herein is the applicant before the Tribunal.

2. The case advanced by the applicant before the Tribunal is:

The applicant was appointed as Village Revenue Officer on10.12.2010 at Parimpudi Cluster-I of Koyyalagudem mandal, Westgodavari District. While so, the 1[st] respondent issued proceedingsdated 14.05.2013 transferring her to Pangidigudem Cluster ofJangareddygudem mandal on the basis of G.O.Ms.No.100, dated22.04.2013, making transfers on the basis of counselling. Contendingthat she had not made any application seeking her transfer, and that theaction of respondent authorities in transferring her unilaterally is illegal,she approached the Tribunal.

At the time of admission, the Tribunal granted status quo orderson 22.05.2013.

The 1[st] respondent filed counter affidavit stating that theapplicant was appointed on compassionate grounds since her husbanddied while in service as a Village Revenue Officer (VRO) ofJangareddygudem Cluster-2. It is stated in the counter that theapplicant applied for permission from 11.05.2013 to 16.05.2013 forappearing departmental exams and thereafter she applied for leavefrom 17.05.2013 to 25.05.2013 stating that her uncle is seriously ill and that he is required to be admitted in King George Hospital, Vizag. It isalso stated that the Tahsildar, Koyyalagudem, reported that theapplicant failed to discharge her functions as VRO properly due towhich day-to-day administration was hampered, and that the applicant,without inspecting the land as required under the A.P. Water, Land andTrees Act, recommended for issue of electricity connection to the borewell, due to which, the ryots of the adjoining lands have madecomplaints which led to filing of writ petitions before this Court. TheTahsildar also reported that the applicant failed to issue applicationforms to the public for issue of Aadhar Cards and, therefore, on therecommendation of the Tahsildar, the Revenue Divisional Officerissued proceedings transferring the applicant to Pangidigudem Cluster-II. It is further stated that when the applicant was on leave, oneD.Venkata Raju was posted as VRO in Parimpudi Cluster-I and that hisposting was much prior to passing of status quo orders by the Tribunaland hence the interim orders of the Tribunal could not be implemented.

The Tribunal, after going through the merits of the case,dismissed the O.A., on the ground that the applicant was transferreddue to specific allegation of lapses on her part and hence the transferorders cannot be treated as illegal or arbitrary.

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant (petitioner) and thelearned Government Pleader for the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time oftransfer of the petitioner to Pangidigudem cluster, she had put in onlyfour years of service and unless she completes five years of service,she cannot be transferred; and as she has now completed seven yearsof service, she may be permitted to submit a representation to therespondent authorities and the respondent authorities may be directedto consider the same and pass appropriate orders.

5. Learned Government Pleader submits that it is always open tothe petitioner to make a representation and to the respondentauthorities to consider the same and pass appropriate orders inaccordance with law.

6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learnedcounsel for both the parties, we grant liberty to the petitioner to make arepresentation to the respondent authorities within three weeks from thedate of receipt of a copy of this order, upon which the respondentauthorities are directed to consider the same and pass orders, inaccordance with law, within two months from the date of receipt ofrepresentation.

7. The writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

___________________

G. CHANDRAIAH, J

31[st] December, 2015

__________________________

A. SHANKAR NARAYANA, J

ksm

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH

AND

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA

ksm

WRIT PETITION No. 42785 of 2015

31[st] December, 2015