ORDER:

This writ petition is filed for the following relief:

“…to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the official respondents herein in transferring the petitioner vide impugned Proc.Rc.No.979/E4.D/MZ-I/2014, dated 27.07.2024 and consequentially posting the 4^th un-official respondent vide Proc.Rc.No.979/E4.D/MZ-I/2014, dated 27.07.2024 by the 3^rd respondent, wherein the petitioner herein was transferred from the O/o Dy. DM and HO, Mahabubabad to PHC Chinnakodur of Siddipet District, instead of retaining at same place under Principal Office Bearer of TGO or without considering in any one of the option exercised by the respondents, hence both the impugned transfer orders are illegal, arbitrary and contrary transfers guidelines issued under 6[c] of G.O.Ms.No.80, Finance Dept. dated 03.07.2024 and are liable to be set aside, with a further direction to the respondents either to retain the petitioner or conduct fresh/re-counseling and may pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. Heard Sri M.R. Tagore, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as MPHA (M) on 28.02.1985 and subsequently promoted to the post of Community Health Officer (CHO) on 08.12.2012. The petitioner is scheduled to retire on 30.11.2025 on attaining the age superannuation of 61 years. Being an Office Bearer of the Telangana Gazetted Officers (TGO) Association, the petitioner is entitled to exemption from compulsory transfer as per G.O.Ms.No.80, dated 03.07.2024, which mandates retention for Office Bearers of recognized unions.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that despite the petitioner's request for retention on medical grounds and the submission of transfer preferences, the petitioner was transferred on 27.07.2024 from the office of Dy. DMHO, Mahabubabad to PHC, Chinnakodur, Siddipet District, which is at a distance of 180 km away and the said transfer was made in direct contravention of the guidelines set forth in G.O.Ms.No.80.

5. It is also submitted that, upon receiving the transfer order, the petitioner submitted a representation to respondent No.2 on 30.07.2024, requesting either retention at the current place of posting or consideration for one of the options exercised by the petitioner. However, the same was not considered

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned transfer order is arbitrary, illegal, and in violation of established transfer norms, particularly the rights granted to Office Bearers under the relevant guidelines.

7. As such, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for the quashing of the transfer order or alternatively, seeking his retention at the current place of posting or for consideration of the transfer options exercised by the petitioner. In the event of denial, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks re-counseling or a fresh process in accordance with the applicable transfer rules and the relevant guidelines.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, as directed by the Government, though the petitioner had submitted transfer options, without considering the same, the Government had transferred the petitioner to a station situated far from the current place of posting. In adherence to the said transfer order, the petitioner had joined the new place of posting and subsequently submitted a complaint to the Director on 30.07.2024.

9. Learned Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that upon considering the representation of the petitioner, the Government will review the matter and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, as directed by this Court in the writ petitions filed by several other similarly situated employees.

10. Having re