HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.37268 of 2014 Date: 18-12-2014 Between G.Ravi;
and another … Petitioners and The State of A.P., Rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Panchayat Raj Dept., A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad; and 2 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.37268 of 2014 Order:
Heard Sri Kasa Jagan Mohan Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development.
2. This writ petition is filed questioning the orders of the Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, the 2nd respondent herein, dated 24-11-2014, keeping the transfer orders of Mandal Parishad Development Officers (MPDOs) of Y.S.R. Kadapa District issued by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Zilla Praja Parishad, Y.S.R. Kadapa District in abeyance as arbitrary and illegal.
3. The petitioner is the Zilla Parishad, Y.S.R. Kadapa District, represented by its Chairman.
The respondents in the counter questioned the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner not being the party affected by the order resulting to the transfer has no locus to question the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent.
The maintainability is further questioned by referring to Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. According to sub-section (3), the Administrative Tribunal for a State shall also exercise, on and from the date with effect from which the provisions of this sub-section apply to any local or other authority or corporation, all the jurisdiction, powers and authority exercisable immediately before the date by all courts.
4. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents contended that the affected parties are the MPDOs whose transfers were kept in abeyance by the orders of the 2nd respondent but the Chairman, Zilla Parishad cannot file a writ petition invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. The jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is discretionary in nature and can be invoked only for the enforcement of any fundamental right or legal right. If at all any right is said to be affected by the orders of the 2nd respondent, it is that of the MPDOs whose transfers were kept in abeyance but not that of the Chairman of the Zilla Parishad.
It is true that the CEO of the Zilla Parishad passed the transfer orders in consultation with the Zilla Parishad. But on that score, it cannot be said that any right of the Chairman of Zilla Parishad, Y.S.R. Kadapa District is violated enabling him to invoke the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Transferring an employee is an incident of service. If at all there is any grievance relating to the transfer, it has to be ventilated by the employee concerned and not by nobody else. Furthermore, by virtue of Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, even the employee affected by the transfer has to approach the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal for redressal or remedy at first instance and shall not approach this Court directly.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court considers that the writ petition is not maintainable. It is not inclined to go into the merits of contentions of the rival parties. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed as not maintainable. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No costs.
R.KANTHA RAO, J.
18th December, 2014. Ak Note:-
Issue C.C. in two days. (B/o) Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.37268 of 2014 18th December, 2014. (Ak)