D. Purushotham v. The State Of Telangana,
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.3809 OF 2017 DATED : 06.02.2017 Between :
D.Purushotham,, S/o.Narayana, Age : 58 yrs, Occu : Forest Beat Officer, O/o.FBO, Zaheerabad beat, Zaheerabad Range, Sangareddy Division, Sangareddy District.
.. Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad & others.
.. Respondents This court made the following :
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.3809 OF 2017 ORDER :
Petitioner is the forest beat officer. He was posted to Zaheerabad Beat. The state of Telangana divided the existing districts and formed new districts. In the place of 10 existing districts, 31 districts have now come into existence. As a consequence to the formation of new districts, Government issued orders in G.O.Rt.No.164, Environment, Forests, Science & Technology (For.II) Department, dated 11.10.2016 for transferring and posting various officials of the Forest Department. By the said order, petitioner was also shifted from Zaheerabad beat to Mangalparthy beat. Zaheerabad was originally forming part of Medak District. After carving out Sanga Reddy and other areas out of Medak District, Zaheerabad is now part of newly formed Sanga Reddy District. Petitioner is not challenging the original decision of the Government transferring him in the above manner. 2.
It appears petitioner persuaded his immediate superior officer for retaining him at the same place. The proposal submitted by Chief Conservator of Forests/Conservator of Forests, Medak for retaining of petitioner in Zaheerabad was considered by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and by the order impugned the request for retention was rejected and this order is under challenge in this writ petition.
3.
As seen from the order of the Government, it is purely rearrangement of the existing personnel as a consequence to formation of new districts. As a consequence of formation of new districts, when employees are relocated for administrative reasons,
the Court cannot interfere only on the ground that petitioner is due for retirement shortly i.e., 30.09.2017. Except for contending that petitioner has short tenure, no other reasons are stated for retention of the petitioner. It is not in dispute that petitioner has been working for more than four years and in the normal circumstances, he was liable for transfer.
4.
As noted above, the order of the Government dated 11.10.2016 where under, petitioner was shifted from Zaheerabad to Mangalparthy is not under challenge and subsequent order only rests on the earlier Government decision and the head of the department order is in compliance thereon. Hence, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition and is liable to be dismissed. 5.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 6th February, 2017 Rds