WP/23008/2004 of Smt. K. Sobha Rani, Vs The Director of Health Services, A.P., on 30 December 2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BIKSHAPATHY

and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA

WRIT PETITION NO : 23008 of 2004

Between:

Smt. K. Sobha Rani, W/o. M. Bhanu Murthy, GLC Unit, Cumbum, Prakasam District.

AND

..... PETITIONER

1 The Director of Health Services, A.P., Sultan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad.

2 The Regional Director of Medical and Health Services, Guntur Region, Guntur, Guntur District.

3 B. Krishna Reddy, S/o. Not Known, Guntur.

4 N. Mokshalingeswara Rao, GLC Unit Ponnur, Guntur, District.

.....RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toIssue a writ, order or orders, direction more particularly one in the nature of writ ofcertiorari calling for the records pertaining to the O.A.No. 6423/04 dt. 26.11.2004 onthe file of Hon'ble A.P. Administrative Tribunal and quash the same andconsequentially set-aside the impugned proceedings in Rc.No. 1486/B2/1998 dt.20.11.2004 issued by the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary, malafidy and contraryto G.O.Ms.No. 512 Fin (WM) Department, dt. 14.6.2004 and G.O.Ms.No. 767 Fin(WM) Department dt. 21.8.2002 issued by the Government and violation of principlesof natural justice.

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.CHANDRAIH NAIDU

Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR SERVICES-I

Counsel for Respondent No.3: MR. EADARA PEDDANNA (Caveator for R.3)

The Court made the following:

ORAL ORDER:-(Per GB,J.)

The Writ Petition is filed challenging the order, dated 26.11.2004 passed by theAndhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.6423 of 2004.

2. The petitioner who is working at Cumbum as a Deputy Health Educational Officermade a request to transfer her to Guntur where her husband is working in view ofG.O.Ms.No.512 Finance (W & M) Department, dated 14.6.2004 issued by theGovernment to post the spouse at one place.

3. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that instead of transferring her toGuntur, two persons were promoted and posted in the vacancies, which arose. Shechallenged the order of transfer in O.A. The Tribunal dismissed the same byobserving as follows:

“In the first instance, the applicant has no locus stand to question thepromotions given to the unofficial respondents. The submission of the applicantis that she had earlier submitted representation to post her in one of thevacancies existing and the respondents instead of considering her case, postedthe unofficial respondents on promotion, in those vacancies. No Governmentemployee can get a preferential right to any particular post. When individualsare promoted, it is obvious that first they would be posted in existingvacancies. Incidentally if the applicants request cannot be considered in viewof the promotion and posting of unofficial respondents, they do not give anycause of action for the applicant to question the same. It is always open to herto pursue her representation with the appropriate authorities, in case she hasalready filed, in respect of her request for transfer to a nearby place. Therespondents may consider such request in accordance with Rules. As far asthe claim of the applicant in this O.A. is concerned, it cannot be granted andthe O.A. is therefore dismissed at the admission stage.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Government has issuedspecific directions to transfer as far as possible his spouse to one place. In the instant case, there were two vacancies in Guntur and that were filled up by otherpersons on promotion. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is entitledto consider and transfer to Guntur.

5. We have heard the learned Government Pleader also. Inasmuch as the vacancieswere already filled up, it is necessary that the second respondent shall consider thematter on request, keeping in view the orders issued by the Government on thisaspect.

6. We are not inclined to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. However, we directthe second respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for posting at eitherGuntur or in Ponnur or in other nearby place, taking into consideration the placewhere her spouse is working within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt ofa copy of this order.

__________________

G. BIKSHAPATHY, J.

Date: 30.12.2004

ES

_______________

P.S. NARAYANA, J.

To

1 The Director of Health Services, A.P., Sultan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad.

2 The Regional Director of Medical and Health Services, Guntur Region, Guntur, Guntur District.

3 2 CCs to the G.P for Services I, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (O.U.T).

4 The Registrar, A.P.A.T., Hyderabad.

4 2 CD copies