Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : R.SUBHASH REDDY
G. Ravinder - Appellant
Versus
Commissioner for Endowments, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad - Respondent
Decided On : 04/24/2007
Case No : Writ Petition Nos. 9286 of 2006, 9310, 9328, 8889, 8896, 8941, 8995, 9463, 9470, 9475, 10152, 10167, 10236, 10237, 10239, 10242, 10243, 10244, 10245, 10382, 10030, 10031, 11577, 11578, 11579, 11580, 11801, 10060, 10047, 9936, 10045, 10261, 10263, 10280, 10509, 11238, 14575, And 12607 of 2006
Constitution of India - Article 226 - Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 - Section 39, 8 - Transfer of Office Holders and Servants Working - Writ Petition was passed in Rc. by the Commissioner of Endowments. The petitioner who is working in the establishment is transferred and posted in the establishment - Averments as stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are thus - Petitioner’s wife is working as School Assistant and after a long gap and lot of efforts she was posted there and they are living together. His mother, who is aged about 70 years is a T.B. patient and is also suffering with kidney problems and the petitioner is taking care of his mother and there is no other person to attend to his mother and give medical assistance. The impugned order of transfer is arbitrary exercise of power with mala fide intention and no opportunity was given to the petitioner and had a notice been given, the petitioner would have satisfied the authorities for his retention at the present place. There are no medical facilities available at the transferred place for the treatment of his mother and there is also no possibility of his wife’s transfer as she is working at High School - Petitioner submitted representation stating that both wife and husband are working, but without considering the said representation, the impugned orders are passed - Impugned orders are arbitrary and also contrary to G.O.Ms and thus pleading, the petitioner sought for setting aside of the said orders - Held orders are in the nature of administrative instructions and such instructions will not come in the way of the competent authority to effect transfers for the better administration of the institutions governed by the provisions of A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. In a number of cases, it is also stated that the Office Holders are transferred on the verge of their retirement and individual hardships are also expressed on account of serious ailments to the members of their family and the availability of medical facilities for treatment of such illness. But, they are not the grounds germane for interference by this court with the orders of transfer in exercise of the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is well settled that interference with the orders of transfer can be made only if the transfer is made with mala fide intention or without having competence or when it intends to affect the conditions of service of the incumbent transferred. The transfers are made for better administration of the institutions in view of unearthing of some of the incidents and the protection afforded by Rule 33 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Office Holders and Servants Service Rules, 2000 is not meddled with. Moreover, transfer is an incidence of service and no employee can claim that he will work only at a particular place - Writ petitions are dismissed
Common Order:
In this batch of cases, the orders of transfer of Office Holders and servants working in endowments and charitable institutions, governed by the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, are challenged. The said orders of transfer are passed by the Commissioner of Endowments, in exercise of powers vested in him under Section 39 read with Section 8 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short “the Act”) on the ground of better administration of the institutions. Though individual orders are passed, all the orders of transfer are passed on similar lines.
For the purpose of convenience in disposal of the batch of cases, I refer to the facts in Writ Petition No.9286 of 2006.
The order under challenge in Writ Petition No.9286 of 2006 was passed in Rc.No.A3/11094/2006-18 (M.Z.III) by the Commissioner of Endowments. The petitioner who is working in the establishment of Sri Raja Rajeswara Swamy Devasthanam, Vemulawada is transferred and posted in the establishment of Sri Laxmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam, Yadagirigutta.
The averments as stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are thus:
Petitioner’s wife is working as School Assistant at Shatrajpally, Vemulawada Mandal and after a long gap and lot of efforts she was posted there and they are living together at Vemulawada. His mother, who is aged about 70 years is a T.B. patient and is also suffering with kidney problems and the petitioner is taking care of his mother and there is no other person to attend to his mother and give medical assistance. The impugned order of transfer is arbitrary exercise of power with mala fide intention and no opportunity was given to the petitioner and had a notice been given, the petitioner would have satisfied the authorities for his retention at the present place. There are no medical facilities available at the transferred place for the treatment of his mother and there is also no possibility of his wife’s transfer as she is working at Zilla Parishad High School, Shatrajpally. Though the petitioner submitted representation stating that both wife and husband are working, but without considering the said representation, the impugned orders are passed. The impugned orders are arbitrary and also contrary to G.O.Ms.No.71, dated 1.4.2006, and thus pleading, the petitioner sought for setting aside of the said orders.
Common counter-affidavit has been filed by the Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad stating as under:
Some awful incidents have come to light, which rocked the Assembly resulting in ordering of Vigilance and A.C.B. enquiries on the incidents of Zonnawada and Sullurupet temples, wherein the employees resorted to printing of duplicate tickets and running parallel counters within the temple premises by curtailing the income of the temple and sold the tickets of various Sevas for their personal wrongful gains, and such type of tendency was said to have developed only because of allowing the temple employees at one place for a longer term. To curb such type of tendency and also for better administration of the institutions, it is felt necessary to effect transfer of longstanding temple employees by invoking the provisions of Section 39 of the Act. A meeting was convened with all the Executive Officers of Major temples including Additional Commissioners and they felt that transfers of longstanding employees have to be effected in the interest of better administration. In the said meeting, the Executive Officers informed that because of the longstanding, many employees developed vested interest while keeping in touch with the local people, suppliers, lease holders, contractors, tenants of the temples etc. resulting in financial loss to the temples. They are misusing their office and lobbying with the bidders in public auctions being conducted from time to time, as a result of which, the income of the inst
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.