High Court · 2025

PetitionunderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in allocating the petitioner to the State Andhra Pradesh by issuing the Movement Order vide Rc No. 58/E1 /DM&HO/VKB/201 7 DATED 28 02'2017 as illegal' improper' arbitrary' un constitutionar and against the principres of naturar justice. consequentry direct the 1 to 3 respondents to give posting anywhere in Hyderabadi Telangana State forthwith l I I : I i I I I i ,l lA NO:'t o F 2025 Petition under Section i 5-1 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'r to 3 to give posting anywhere in Hydera bad/Terangana State forthwith pending disposal of above Writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI MOHD ASHRAF ALI Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 to 3: SRI SHEETAL KUMAR, GP FOR SERVICES.I Counsel for the Respondent No.4 & 5: SRI A.RAGHURAM, AGP FOR STATE OF AP The Court made the following: ORDER ? raff\: :,,-::*;i:,;i: r:;1 " r- -:l,l\^r.i'r :::t,,/ / TIIE HONBI,E THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KT'MAR SII{GH TIIE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M, MOHIUDDIN AND WRIT PETITION No.2z$328 of 2o25 ORDER: This writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the action of the respondents in allocating the petitioner to the Stale of Andhra Pradesh uide Movernent order dated 28.02'2017 as illegal, improper, arbitrarly, unconstitutional and to direct respondcnt Nos.1 to 3 to give posting in Fiyderabad/Telangana State.

2. Heard Sri Mohd. Ashraf Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sheetal Kumar, learned Government Pleader for Sen ices-I appearing ioi re spondent Ncs.1 to 3, Sri A.Raghuram, iearned Assistan'. Govcrnment Pieader for the State of Andhra Pradesh appearing for responcient Nos.4 and 5 and perused the record.

3. Learned counsei for thc pctitioner contends that the petitioner u'as apoointed as Cir.'il Assistar-rt Surgeon uide sen'ice order dated i4.O8.2000 anci posted at Tribal Public Health Centrc, Azamnagar at Warangai District and had opted for Telangana State at the time oi reorganization of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh. It is contended that however, the 2 authorities had allotted/ allocated thc petitioner Lo the State of Andhra Pradesh uide order dated 28.O2.2OI7.

4. A perusal oi the record shou's that the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 10.09.2018 Lo thc Homc Minister of Telangana to allocaLe hlm to Telangana State, being aggrieved by the Movement orcier dated'28.O2.2017 .

5. it is further contendei lhat lhe petiiior-rer submittecl another representation dated O5,07.2O2 1 tL\ the Principal Secretary to Gove;:nmcnt, F inance, anci the rc is no responsc from the authorities. I t rs also contended thal if he is allocai"ed to the State of Andhra Pradesh, the education of his children will be disturbed and his old aged and sick tncthe r rn oulcl suffer.

6. It is pertinent lo nole th.lt the petitioner clid rrot plint out any infraction of his legal rights or '..iolation ci an1, 5126s16O provisions and at this juncLure , the qucstion of intcrference br. this Court on account o[ oersona] difficulf,' oi thc pcritioncr does not arise.

7. Further, a Co-ordinate Bench ol this Court while dealing u,ith a similar issue in Writ Petition No. 14626 of 2019 has observed as under: -l "Another impoftant aspect of the case is that in exercise of exeantiue pouLers under the Reorganisation Act, 2014 the GuideLines relating to allocation of S:tate Seruices EmploAees betueen the successor States of And.hra Pradesh and Telangana haue been framed by the Aduisory Committee as per Sectton 80(2) of the Reorqanbation Act 2O 14. The Aduisoru Committee consbtina of senior officers hauinq 'uide ranqe of expeience in adr,inistration felt that 'option' alone does not ht on an emplouee to be allocated to confer anu mondctto the State of his/ her choice. The Committee s successor Sfafes to correlate the iocaL cand[dature/ natiuitg of the employee with the optir:ru for cLllocation along uith senioitg oJ'the ernploge-e ortd incory:orate the same irt tl'te guidelines". uggested the ru n.o ( {. B. This Court in the saicl judgment heid that personal diflicultv cannot be a ground for interfering with the allocation of the petitioner to a particular state in the following terms: "In the con-sidered opinion of this Couri, the petitioner uants the ailoctttion done in the gertr 2O15 to be declared as iLlegol and. a prdyer has been made for allocation ta the State of Telangana. In the consi.dered opinion of this Court, on account of some persona! diJJia,tlties of tle petitioner, this Couft cannct interfere utith the order of allocation of the pet[tioner to the StcLte of An dhra Prctdesh and there is no illegalitg or irregulaitg comrnitted u..thile allocating the petitioner to the State of Andh.ra Pradesh".

9. In the present Writ Petition, the petitioner is seeking allotment to the State of Telangana on the grounds of personal difficulty by setting aside the aliotment done in |ne year 2017. I l I *:.E4*EilS ':**irr \" \.. -ITI This Court is of the view that on acccunL of some personai difficulties of the petitioner, this Court cannot intcrfere u,ith thc order of aliocation of the petitioner to the State ol -{nclhra Pradesh more particularly '*,hen there is no iilegality or irregularity' committed while ailocating the pe titioncr to the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Writ Petition is dr:void of mcrits and is liable to be dismissed-

10. The Writ Fetition is acccrdinglv dismissei. No orrler as to Consequently, miscellaneou.s peliticns, if tn_v pend -rg, shall stand closed. ,TRUE COPY// SD/-T. SRINIVASA REDDY REGISTRAR A \SISTANT To,

1. One CC to SRI MOHD ASHRAF ALt, Advocate [Op cl SECTION OFFICER Two CCs to SRI A.RAGHURA|V, AGP FOR STATE OF Ap, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES-|, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies j 2 II 4 BSR LS HIGH COURT DATED: 1910812025 ::'.1:!>, -tiiE St/i (l ,f u 4 sEP 202s ! \ ORDER WP.No.24328 of 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS 1