The High Court · 2025

Heard Sri Aravind Kumar Kata, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The etitioner a proached the Cou* seekino Drayer as under: ".....to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus: (a) By declaring the entire action of the respondents, particularly the entire action of the respondents 1& 2 in issuing the present Impugned Memo No.Estt/84/299/2023 dated; 27-5-2023 of the 1tt respondent and consequential proc No. CPCH/E2/7729-35/2023 dated; 2-6-2023 of the 2nd respondent wherein attached the services of the petitioner to the 3'd respondent office by simply mentioning on administrative grounds even without assigning any such reasons, during the ban on transFers is as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, colorable exercise of power, vindictive attitude and nothing but stigma/punitive in nature and contrary to various judicial pronouncements in 2 the ;r imp r 3r (b) an contirrr Wa r l:l to lh /84/29 respcn CPCIJ /I resp )nr this l-lc circ u nt r t)iect matter and set aside or qurrslr the ild proceedings. lconsequently to direct the respondents to c and retain the services of the petiti:n,:r as in the O/o. 2nd respondent without refel,ence r present Impugned Memo No. Estt )i2023 dated; 27-5-2023 of the 1.t lent and consequential proc No. )/7729-35/2023 dated; 2-6-2023 o,, thl: 2nd r:nt, and pass such other order or or,Je"s as -'ble Court may deem fit and proper ir, the til nces of the case. " 3, The ct appointed a Central P'isr State, the se of the petitioner, in brief, is th,rt he was a lail Warder on 06.03.2012 anrj p()sted at r, Rajahmundry. After the bifurcation of the Iretitioner was transferred to the o Ffice of respondent I r .2 in February 20t4. Respondent Nc,. 1 ssued a memo dated Central Pr it;c conseq uent a to report t() memo mer,:l com m ittee d )7.05.2023 to the petitioner, transferrin(t him to -, Sangareddy, and respondent No,2 i:;sued a order dated 02.06.2023 directing the pr,ltiti6nsr rt:spondent No.3 without any justificirti:tn. The , references the minutes of the este blishment rted 25.05.2023 but fails to explain v,,hy the , 3 petitioner's transfer is necessary or justified. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 4 E E E RD T er lev n A) No. Estt/ E4/ 299/20 23, da d 27.O .2 o22 rssued bvthe r d n N .l-Th Dir c v, e n G r n a or ec on rV ce ch n e tra ct h re nder: a n "Sri. B. Ravi Kumar Reddy, Warder Central prison, Cherlapally is attached in Central prison Sangareddy on Administrative Grounds. 2) The Superintendent Prison, Cherlapalli requested to relieve the individual with a direction to report before the Superintendent Central Prison, Sangareddy. Centra I 3) The duties of relief and joining of the above individual should be reported to this office in due cou rse. " r Th v rti n t c e B) o e 2 s 7 9- d 2 2 t No.2- Th d o o o2 t e Pr o hereunder: e e r 4 "ln l trsuance of Head Office orders issu':rl i.t the referertr:€ cited Sri. B. Ravi Kumar Reddy, Warder Central ',son, Cherlapally who is under crriels of attach rre - t: to Central Prison Sangrerlrly on Admin str :rtive Grounds is relieved of his duties al: this Institut o r on the Afternoon of 02-O6-2-02-) wlth a directi 1E to report before the Super ntendent Centra l,/F -ison Sangareddy immediately. - lre Superintendent Central Prison Sangar-eddy is reqrrr:s :r:d to inform the date of joining of th'3 ilbove Warder e - Central Prison Sangareddy to the Head (lffice under i1t rxation to this institution." The Crunter affidavit has been fil ed onb ehalf of c) respond nl s, in particular, par -e,xtElted he reu nde r_l

4. In reply to Para Nos. B & 9 of the , it is submitted that, the petitioner ht,:rein : transferred to Central .Prison, Sangar::ddy rer, he was temporarily attached tc :eltral :;;angareddy, for administrative conv()nience as a punishment, which is not againsl the l of natural justice, not improper, not egilinst :,s and not illegal. It is only as pat.t of ',ing smooth and effective running of the tration. It is further submitted ti.lt, the :,r herein is not transFerred bu: onlY affidit'zi was nc but -at Priso r , and ro princ i rl the ru mair tal adm r ir petitior d,i J temporarily attached to Central prison, Sangareddy, while his pay and allowance will continue to be drawn and paid as usual at Central prison, Cherlapalli, with no financial loss to him or his family. It is further submitted that, even though the petitioner was issued attachment orders to Central Prison, Sangareddy vide Order No. Estt/E4/299/2023, Dt: 27.05.2023 of the O/o. the Director General of prisons & Correctional Services, Telangana State, Hyderabad and consequential Procs. No. CpCh/E2/7729-35/2023, Dt: 02.06.2023 of the O/o, the Superintendent, Central prison, Cherlapalli, on administrative grounds, he has not received the said order and not reported to duty so far since 02.06.2023. The orders are posted to his house. He has been unauthorized absent from duty since 02.06.2023 without the prior permission of the higher officials thereby causing much inconvenience to the ad m in istra tion,,. D) T erelevant Daraq raph Nos.4 an beh fof ton I fta vit 5 of there lv u r b the r n a e h "4. It is further submitted that, the main contention of the respondent authorities that, the authority who passed above orders is having power for affect transfe!-. and posting, and further stated f .! 6 /.,as temporarily attached to central lri ion, ciCy, for administrative convenience and not 'rishment and further stated that, arirliticnal I staff are required to the institutirln t'orm ,lnd administration point of view, n this i'- is relevant to submit that, (0,/) llead and (B) Warders of Sangareddy Centrai lail nt to work on attachment basis to vrork in a ls by entertaining the request lf the rls. In those circumstances, the respondent ies, instead of disturbing my services r'rom lail Charlapally, the respondent autho'ities back said individuals who were worl':inll an lnt basis in other jails. Htrving rodating the Regular Warders of Sarrgarr:ddy lail to work in other jails on attachmr:nt :lasis rLaining their representations, disbursinlt my , including my family members is c':rtainly aw, opposed to all principles of natural that, . Sa ng are ,as a [)L g ua rtl in secu[i:y rega rcl Warc e rr were s( othe' in d ivid r, auth )'i1 Centr;: I can all atta(:itn acco I11r Centr: I by ertt SETV C C bad n j u sti :3. :. It is further submitted that, the pcwer rvith the authority has to exercise, honostly, 3ly, reasonably with public interest, In this - hand, the respondents while issuing the impugned orders dted;27-5-2022 and 2-6- ,:t exercised their power honestly, bonaf edly, rtrly. Therefore, same is malafied in nilture r ice in law. Therefore, the present W P. is vest 3d bontrf ie case c presen 202) reascn and n *m 7 paid for in the interest of liable to be allowed as j uslice. " DIsCU SION AN D co NLCU SI ON

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitsthatthepetitioner,videdetailedrepresentationdated 28.07.2025, informed ResPondent No.1 that he had been working as a Warden since 2014 at Central Prison, Cherlapalli' and on 02.06.2023, Petitioner was transferred to Central Prison, SangareddY on attachment' The petitioner further mentioned in the said representation that he has a 69-ydar- oldmotherandistheonlysonresponsibleforherhealthand emotional support at this age and he also has respo nsibilities towards his wife and children' The petitioner further mentioned in the said representation that petitioner has been financially, psychologically' and emotionally due to the dailY commute from CherlaPalli to SangareddY, and that the imPugned order is exPlained in paragraPh No.4 of the counter affidavit as a temporary attachment to Central Prison' administrative convenience and not as a SangareddY for suffering punishment. I

6. L.ettt n submits tht the rec L e representlt No.l ht:rt: petitio n€ r t petitionerr ; the reP l'r accorda r'l'l( individ u I s their req u :,1 counsel appearing on behalf of the rletitioner I the respondent No.1 has to necessa'i11' consider ;: of the petitioner made vide p(ltitionei''s ,rn dated 28.0t.2025 addressed to the rt:spondent ', and pass appropriate orders allcc'rting the r work at Central prison, Cherlapalli )r'to post the t Sub-Jail, Bhongir as stated at paragrag:h No'6 of ;rffidavit filed on behalf of the pet tioner in ro law as the respondent No.1 had ac':ornmodated ;rt Sangareddy Central Jail and other jilil:' based on rsts, and therefore, the petitioner's re(:luest also deserves s rnila r consideration.

7. Lefrr Service='; d aDpearinq on behalf oft PI ade r Iclipo ndents submits directitlg . th n 1 b disoosed of o con ider reDresgn" lation of the accorda n :e to law within areasona ble DEriod. etitioner dated 28.0L.2O25 in

8. Lea In d petitione I unsel aoDe arr nq on be alf of h liance on the Division Ben ig-dgnlcn!. of his d1 1 2 oo1. sed i /< l;. 9 W.P. No.1 44 ot 2tOO1 and the r vant Dorti on of the said order is extra cted hereunder: "Th is Cou rt is, therefore, entitled to see as to whether the impugned order of transfer was by way of or in lieu of punishment, in the circumstances referred to hereinbefore."

9. Basing on the above Division Bench Judgment, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the transfer of the petitioner from Cherlapalli Central lail to Sangareddy Central Jail is not a temporary attachment but, in fact, an order of punishment. Therefore, in the present case, the petitioner had been punished by viftue of the impugned order issued by Respondent No.1 dated 27'05'2023 and the consequential order issued by Respondent No'2 dated 02.06.2023, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the relief prayed for in the present writ petition. '

10. This Court taking into consideration the Division Bench judgment, dated 10.1O.2OO1 passed in W.P.o.13344 of 2OO1 and also the specific averments made in the affidavit and reply affidavit filed by the petitioner opines that the respondent No.1 is bound to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put-forth 10 vide petiti )ner's representation, dated 28.01.2025 addressecl :r: the 1tt respondent, in accordance to law within a r,ei, sonable period.

11. TAK]|t\IG INTO CoNs D ERATION: I a) The af rrresaid facts and circumstances of the case, b) The s rrbmissions made by the learnetl counsel appea ring on behalf of the petitioner ;rnd the learne,d Assistant Government Pleader for liervices appela ring on behalf of the respondents, c) The :ontents of the impugned order dated 27.O5 '.?.O22 of the respondent No'1 and the consie,luential proceedings dated 02.O6.!1023 of the r -.spondent No.2 issued to the ptrtitioner hereir (referred to and extracted above), d) Ther . \/erments made at paragraph No,.4 in the count':r affadavit filed on behalf of the respondents (refr:r'ed to and extracted above), e) The a'rerments made at paragraph Nos.4 and 5 of the rr'ply affidavit filed on behalf of the pettitioner to th( counter filed on behalf of the respondents (refr:r 'ed to and extracted above), .--*.-! : I *-' ,*a&$&#*li \ \ 7 f) The contents of the petitioner,s representation dated 28.O1 .2025, which admittedly had not been considered as on date, g) The specific plea of the petitioner that respondent No.1 considered similar requests as put_forth by the petitioner in the present case and accommodated individuals at Sangareddy Centrat Jail and other jails based on the said requests . The writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.l to consider the request of the petitioner made vide petitioner,s representation dated 28.O1.2O25 addressed to the respondent No.1 herein and pass appropriate orders pertaining to petitioner's request regarding altocating the petitioner to work at pAC, Cher.lapalli or to post the petitioner at Sub-Jai!, Bhongir as stated at paragraph No.6 of the reply affidavit filed on behatf of the petitioner in accordance to law within a period of three(3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and duly communicate the decision on petitioner's representation dated 2&.OL.2OZS to the t2 petition€ r herein. However, there shall be no order as to (:(t s ls' Misr:e :ll I reous petitions, if any, pending ir this writ petition, si;a lstand closed' //TRUE COPY// SD/.V. KAVITHA DEPU'TY REGISTRAR .i' rri SiEOTION OFFICER The Directcr ( ;eneral of Prisons and correctional services chenchalguda, Telangana llt rte Hyderabad TheSuperrrlkr'.centCentralPrison,Cherlapally,Medchall/lakajigiriDistrict. The Super irrtr rr'Cent Central Prison, Sangareddy, Sangareddv District' ThePrincical:iecretaryHome(Prisons)Department'Secrr:tariatHyderabad' One CC tc S :'1. ARVIND KUMAR KATA Advocate IOPUC] Two CCs rc I P for Services' High Court for the State of Telzrngana at Hyderabarl [' ).JT] Two CD CcP ;r,; To, 1 2 J 4 5 A 7 KKS BS 2 CC TODAY :f,,j .ATE o f ,(, ( ( O '\ '! ,H ,.\.,,1.:r..:^.\ j.:_- -. :. N6 Ii\r t ^,( ::;-. HIGH COUR DATED:281A,4,2025 ORDER WP.No.1438it tt 2023 // //o K5 DISPOSING'TI {E WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COII}TS