IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
B. Krishna Mohan, J.
Dr. Beulah Priscilla - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Health Medical and Family Welfare Department and others. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 5622 of 2022
Decided On : 08-08-2022
Constitution of India, 1949 – Article, 226 – Persons with Disabilities Act 1995 – Power of High Court to issue certain writs – Discriminatory – Writ petition is filed questioning action of respondent picking up petitioner for transfer under leaving unofficial respondents proposal of transfer though they are having equal term of long standing of service in descending order transfer policy of Government discriminatory – Held, Court does not find any irrationality 2nd respondent in choosing petitioner for transfer in preference to unofficial respondents impugned action is justified and exercised within its jurisdiction – Needs no interference – Petitioner to make an application for retransfer to authority concerned within a period order and on receipt of any such application from petitioner considered by authorities concerned strictly in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible subject to availability vacancies – Writ Petition is disposed of.
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent No.2 in picking up the petitioner for transfer under 30% cap leaving the unofficial respondents No.4 to 6 from the proposal of transfer though they are having equal term of long standing of service in the descending order under the transfer policy of the Government, as discriminatory.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents No.1 to 3.
3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor in Pathology by the respondent No.2 and she was posted to the respondent No.3-College on 22.07.2015 and she joined in the said place on 23.07.2015 where she is continuing till now in the said place. Along with the petitioner another 28 Doctors including the respondents No.4 to 6 were appointed as Assistant Professors in Pathology Department and they were posted in various medical colleges who joined in the service on the same day dated 23.07.2015 at their respective places. A provisional seniority list of Assistant Professors appointed between 2014 to 2017 by way of lateral entry and direct recruitment was prepared by the respondent No.2 vide proceedings dated 05.02.2022. As per the merit rank in the selection, the names of the candidates who were appointed along with the petitioner were shown at Sl.No.7 to 36 and 38 in which the unofficial respondents were shown at Sl.Nos.9, 16 and 35 and the petitioner’s name was shown at Sl.No.36. Thus in the said seniority list the unofficial respondents have become seniors to the petitioner.
4. While so, the respondent No.1 issued certain guidelines for transfer of regular employees in Health, Medical and Family Welfare Department vide G.O.Rt.No.40, HM & FW (B1) Department, dated 28.01.2022. As per the said guideline No.3(v), all the employees who have completed five years of service at a station as on 28.02.2022 shall be mandatorily transferred and as per clause 3(11), the services in all the cadres at a station will be counted while calculating the period of stay. As per clause 3(15)(h), priority shall be given for long standing employees downwards while effecting the transfers and the ban on the transfers is relaxed from 01.02.2022 to 28.02.2022 and the same is further relaxed from 25.02.2022 to 30.03.2022 vide G.O.Rt.No.128 Health, Medical & Family Welfare (B1) Department, dated 24.02.2022. But the number of employees to be transferred is restricted to 30% of the total cadre strength and it should be done in descending order of the length of stay in a station.
5. The above said provisional seniority list dated 05.02.2022 is in operation as on today and the total cadre strength in Pathology department is 112 and out of which 30% of posts comes to 33. As stated supra, the respondents No.4 to 6 are shown at Sl.Nos.9, 16 and 35 in the said seniority list and the petitioner’s name is shown at Sl.No.36 as they have joined in the service on the same day at their respective places on 23.07.2015 completing six years eight months and nine days of service and as such they all became eligible and liable under the said transfer policy subject to the limit of 30% cap. The respondent No.2 made an exercise under the said transfer policy and prepared a list of eligible persons for effecting transfers for which the petitioner was included whereas the unofficial respondents No.4 to 6 have been kept out of the purview of the transfers by placing them below the names of the candidates who were identified under 30% cap for the said transfers.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.2 ought to have relied upon the seniority list which was prepared as per the merit rank at the time of appointment into the service even for effecting the transfers and in the list prepared with respect to the employees who have comp
SupremeToday
Administrative transfers are not subject to judicial review unless issued by an incompetent authority or based on mala fides, reaffirming the principle that employees cannot claim a right to remain i....
Government servants do not have a vested right to remain in a post; transfers must adhere to established guidelines and require prior approval from the Chief Minister to prevent arbitrary actions.
Transfer decisions may prioritize administrative needs over statutory rights; executive guidelines do not impose enforceable rights upon employees regarding transfer policies.
Transfer of employees is an essential condition of service governed by administrative exigencies, and courts should exercise restraint in interfering with such orders unless they are proven to be ill....
Transfer orders must be based on administrative feasibility, and personal hardships do not guarantee entitlement if guidelines are appropriately followed.
Mutual transfers in Railway services must respect original seniority unless justified; improper reassignment mandates corrective action.
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.