ORDER:

(Per the Hon(cid:146)ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)

Heard Mr.Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr.Ch.Kalyan Rao, learned Government Pleader for General Administration Department appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2; Mr.P.Govind Reddy, learned Special Counsel representing the State of Andhra Pradesh appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.3 and 4; Mr.M.Vidya Sagar, learned Standing counsel for Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Company Limited (APCPDCL) appearing on behalf of respondent No.5; and Mr.G.Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.6.

2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks a direction to respondent No.6 to transfer her to respondent No.5 /

APCPDCL.

3. According to the petitioner, she is a native of Prakasam District of the undivided State of Andhra Pradesh. She was recruited by the then APCPDCL and appointed as Assistant Engineer in Anantapur District on 04.11.2010. Following the bifurcation of the composite State of Andhra Pradesh pursuant to the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014 and formation of the State of Telangana, petitioner was allotted to Andhra Pradesh South Power Distribution Company Limited (APSPDCL) in the year 2014 for discharging her duties. Ultimately she was relieved from APSPDCL on 14.03.2020 and allotted to respondent No.6. It is stated that at the time of bifurcation, petitioner had opted for respondent No.5; however, she was allotted to respondent No.6, whereafter, she was sent on deputation. Since then, petitioner is serving under respondent No.6.

4. It is stated that Government of Telangana vide Circular dated 09.09.2021 has accorded No Objection to those employees seeking transfer from the State of Telangana to the State of Andhra Pradesh on permanent basis provided the concerned employee submitted such application on or before 15.10.2021. It is stated that petitioner had submitted representation before respondent No.6 on 02.03.2021 and 28.09.2021. It is stated that petitioner has got a consent letter from an employee i.e., respondent No.7 who is serving in respondent No.5, though a native of Karimnagar District in the State of Telangana. It is in such circumstances that petitioner seeks a mutual transfer with respondent No.7. Grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.5 has not accorded approval to such permanent allocation of the petitioner. Aggrieved, present writ petition has been filed seeking the relief as indicated above.

5. In the hearing held on 08.01.2023, Mr.G.Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.6 had raised the following objections:

(cid:147)At the outset, Mr. Vidya Sagar has raised a preliminary objection as to maintainability of the writ petition placing reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in Telangana Power Generation Corporation Ltd. v. Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Ltd.1 Adverting to paragraph 16 of the aforesaid decision, he submits that allocation of employees between the two States including amongst the power utility companies has attained finality following the decision of the one man Committee headed by Justice Dharmadhikari.

He submits that in the said paragraph, Supreme Court has directed that decision of the one man Committee shall be executed by all the parties as an order of the Supreme Court.

Further, in paragraph 20 of the said judgment, it is stated that in case any clarification or further direction is required, the concerned party would be entitled to approach the Supreme Court by filing interlocutory application.

Therefore, if the petitioner has any grievance, he should approach the Supreme Court instead of filing writ petition before this Court.(cid:148)

2018 SCC Online SC 3644

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought for time to examine the above objections.

7. In the hearing today, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon paragraph No.28 of the supplementary report dated