High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to and in connection with the impugned G.O.Rt.No.573 IVIA and UD (C1) Dept., dt. 1610612025, issued by the 2nd Respondent, where under, lnter-State transfer orders were issued to the Petitioner and 6th Respondent on mutuar consent basis, without issuing an1) notice and opportunity to the petitioner and set aside the impugned orders, by declaring them as ilegar, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory and viorative of Articres 14 and 16 of the constitution of rndia and arso Vioration of principres of Naturar Justice and consequenfly, direct the Respondents'to continue the services of the Petitioner in Terangana state as per his Locar status and based on his request. lA NO: 2 oF 2025 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the Respondents to continue the petitioner as Dy. Executive Engineer, in lvlunicipal Corporation, Mahaboobnagar, Telangana State, by suspending the operation of impugned G.o.Rt.No.573 tvA and uD (c1) Dept., dt. 16r06t2o25, issued by the 2nd Respondent pending disposat of the above writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI POODATTU AMARENDER counsel for the Respondents No.1&4:sRl G.pRASANTH, AGp FoR SERVICES I counsel for the Respondents No.2&5 :SRr B.RAJESHWAR REDDY, Gp FoR Ap counsel for the Respondents No.3 : Ms.M.SHALTNI, cp FoR SERVTCES il Counsel forthe Respondents No.6 i The Court made the following: ORDER _- THE HON,BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APAR.ESH KI]MAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM I(OSHY WRIT PETITION No.22276 of 2o25 ORDER: Learned counsel Sri Poodattu Amarender appears for the petitioner. Sri G. Prasanth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Serviccs I, appears for respondent Nos' 1 and 4' Sri B.Rajesh'"'"'ar Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Andhra Pradesh, appears for respondent Nos'2 and 5' Ms. M.Shalini, learned Government Pleader for Services-Il, appears for respondent No'3'

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties ( { In pursuance to the Circular Memo No'1896/SPF- 3. lll2021, dated 09.O9.2021 , the petitioner, who was working as the Deputl' Executive Engineer in the Gadwal Municipality under the Telangana State, accorded his consent for being aliocated Andhra Pradesh cadre on mutual grounds. By thc impugned notification dated 2

16.06.2025, the petitioner has been allocated to the Andhra Pradesh cadre and one J.!!jaya Kumar, Deputy Executive Engineer, Tadepalligudem Municipality, West Godavari District, Andhra pradesh, has been ailocated to the State of Telangana. As per the impugned notification, Engineer-in-Chief (PH), Andhra pradesh, Tadepalli, Guntur District, has been directed to relieve respondent No.6, n,ho is working in Andhra pradesh, immediately. The petitioner now does not walt to go to Andhra pradesh. He has taken a plea that the consent for mutual transfer u.as made ll.ay back in the 1,sar' 2021. Both the Governments sat over the matter for four years. Now, the circumstances have changed ancl he is not inclined to be reallocirted to the State of Andhra Pradesh. He claims to be a local candidate of Telangana State as per the presidential Order since he has studied from 4th to 7th classes in Gurukul High School, Jawahar Nagar, Hyderabad, and Brh to 10tr, classes in Sri Lakshmi High School, I(urnool District. On account of this reason only, he was allocated to the Telalgala State and as per his option, he has been working here. )

4. The circular dated 07.Oa-2O17 lays down the gr.ridelines for inter State transfer of Government employees between the State of Andhra Pradesh and the State of Telangana. These guidelines have been framed as per the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 77 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Reorganisation Act"). The petitioner, after his allocation to the State of Telangana, gave his willingness to go back to Andhra Pradesh on permanent basis pursuant to the circular dated 09.09.202 1 vide his representation dated 14.O9.2O2I through proper channel. No objection was also furnished by respondent No.l to respondent No.2 requesting to examine and intimate the decision of Government of Andhra Pradesh. Thereafter, inter-governmenta-I correspondences took place. The Telangana Government gave no objection for mutual transfer on L6.O4.2025. Thereafter, the impugned notification dated 16.06.2025 was issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh approving the inter-State mutual transfer between the petitioner and respondent No.6 on permanent basis. The petitioner made a 4 !-' --'1 representation on 14.07.2025 to withdraw his consent to be transferred to Andhra Pradesh and to be retained in Telangana

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after four years of the petitioner,s consent, the mutual tralsfer has been finalised without issuing any fresh notice or seeking his present consent which violates the principle of audi alteram partem. Tlre petitioner has a-lso taken a plea that the Telangala Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 20 18, does not permit inter-State trarsfers. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notification is therefore arbitrary and discriminatory. It adversely affects his service status. Such permanent change of cadre and forfeiture of seniority r,r,'ithout according any opportunity of beilg heard, shall cause irreparable harm to the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh have vehemently opposed the prayer. They submit that on the consent of the W 5 petitioner and willingness of respondent No.6 to be reallocated on mutual basis, the impugned notification has been issued in terms of the circular dated O9.O9.2O21 and as per the guidelines framed under the Reorganisation Act. The consent cannot be withdrawn after the issuance of the cadre allocation notification. Learned counsel representing the State of Telalgana have referred to the impugned notification wherein it is clearly indicated that respondent No.6 shall be immediately relieved. The circular dated

09.09.2021 also prescribes that once the employee is relieved, the transfer shall be permanent ald the employee sha,ll not be taken back under arty circumstances. I

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to specifically inform whether the petitioner has also been \ t relieved with immediate effect

8. Be that as it may, the impugned notification having been issued on the basis of mutual consent of the petitioner arld respondent No.6 in accordance with the circular dated 09 .O9.2O21 and the provisions of the Reorganisation Act, such a turnaround or volte face carnot 6 be permittecl to be made. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show any .provision under the Reorganisation Act or the circulars or the guideiines framed for inter-State tralsfer whereunder the petitioner can be retained by the State of Telangana after issuance of the impugned notification. In such circumstalces. u.e do not see anv t'eason to interfere in the matter.

9. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPYII SD/-M. OSMAN ALt BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G SECTION OFFICER To, 2 Dr B R nm oeokai - ie6rs;;:. $;;t; ;;t 5i;b' State of Ahonl., piro.rr,,'ii;l'dJJiJt5riat, 1 The Principat Secretarv Municipal Administration and Urban Develooment i;j,#d;;;: ffss[T:!] The Princioal Secretarv Municipal Administration and Urban Develooment Vetagapudi. Guntur B:"?,.?J1r",,, The Chief Secretary, General.Administration Department. Dr. BR. Ambedkar I etangana Secretariat.State of retangini, iivo-#6r'i Il3"rlirTu"'-in-chief' Public Health, Telansana State, AC Guards pubtic Heatth, Garuda Enctave, Tadepaili, Gunrur 5[:r,5:n,""""in-Chief, "7 3 4 5

6. The Dy. Executive Engineer, J. Vijay Kumar, Tadepalli Gudem tr/uniclpality, West Godavari District, AP.

7. One CC to SRI POODATTU AMARENDER, Advocate. [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES l, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUI

9. Two CCs to GP FOR ANDHRA PRADESH, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

10.Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES ll, High Court for the State of Telangana. '1 1 . Two CD Copies. BSK LS HIGH COURT DATED:3010712025 \ 15 BIT 7:&E ORDER WP.No.22276 ot 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS $ {