Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 7327
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J
S HYMAVATHI, TAHASILDAR, MANDASA W/O. CH.MUKUNDA RAO – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAWATHI – Respondent
Writ Petition No: 14490/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S M SUBHAN
For the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES I
Employee transfers must adhere to established guidelines and ensure no violation of constitutional rights during the process.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14, 16, 21 - Writ of Mandamus - The action of the State in transferring an employee without following proper guidelines is challenged as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner contends that she was not given proper posting after being displaced which violates natural justice principles. (Paras 2, 3, 6)
(B) Employment law - Transfer Guidelines - It is established that transfers should comply with stipulated guidelines, especially regarding minimum service periods.
Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the transfer of her position without proper relocation or justification, arguing it violated employment guidelines due to not completing the mandatory service period.
Findings of Court:
The petitioner has been assigned a new role, granting her the right to seek salary for the waiting period.
Issues: The main issue revolves around the legality and fairness of the transfers imposed upon the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court recognized the need for adherence to transfer guidelines and underscored the necessity of legal recourse for salary due during pending postings.
Result: Writ Petition stands disposed of without costs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. posting contrary to established transfer guidelines (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner claims for salary and challenges posting validity (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's directive on salary processing and petition disposition (Para 6) |
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services I appearing for the respondents.
2. The present writ petition challenges the action of respondents in posting 5th respondent in place of petitioner vide proceedings in Rc.No.927/2025, A4, dated 04.06.2025, which is contrary to the transfer guidelines besides being illegal and arbitrary.
3. Petitioner has been working as Tahsildar at Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District. By impugned proceedings, dated 04.06.2025, 5th respondent came to be posted in place of petitioner without petitioner being posted to any other station and that too when she has not completed the 5 years mandatory period for compulsory transfer.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I has placed on record written instructions and also copy of the proceedings in Rc.No.927/2025 A4, dated 08.07.2025, whereby petitioner, who was on waiting for posting, came to be posted as Administrative Officer at the Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tekkali.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner, Tahsildar, cannot be posted as Administrative Officer, which virtually amounted to demotion and further that during the waiting period, she has not been paid any salary so far.
6. In view of subsequent developments that petitioner now has been issued posting orders, dated 08.07.2025, petitioner is granted liberty in case aggrieved by the same to avail appropriate remedy. In so far as non-payment of salary is concerned, as petitioner has been waiting for posting after 5th respondent came to be posted in her place and that only by proceedings, dated 08.07.2025, she has been issued regular posting order, her claim for the salary for the said period is legal, therefore, petitioner is permitted to make representation claiming the same and on such representation being made, the concerned respondents are directed to consider the said request and process the payment of salary within ten days thereafter.
