B.Satyanarayana Reddy v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.20681 OF 2018 DATED :21.06.2018 Between :

B.Satyanarayana Reddy S/o.Rami Reddy, Age : 53 yrs, Working as Asst. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad.

..

Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Agriculture & Cooperation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & another.

.. Respondents This court made the following :

- 2 - THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.20681 of 2018 ORDER :

Heard.

2.

Petitioner is promoted as Cooperative Sub Registrar now redesignated as Assistant Registrar (Cooperative Societies) and posted to Kalavakurthy of Mahaboobnagar District in the year 2010. On 15.12.2010 petitioner was transferred to Rajendranagar. By the order impugned petitioner is brought into the head quarters office of District Cooperative Office, Ranga Reddy district. 3.

Heard learned senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader.

4.

According to learned senior Counsel, petitioner is elected as District Organizing Secretary of Telangana Gazetted Officers Association. Therefore, being an Organizing Secretary, petitioner could not have been shifted from his present place of work. According to learned counsel none of the office bearers are shifted but retained in the same place where they are working. 5.

Transfers are regulated by the guidelines formulated by the Government. Guidelines enable accommodation to the office bearers of the recognized Association from the place where they are working to represent the grievance of the members of the Association effectively. In the case on hand, petitioner is retained in Ranga Reddy District, though he has been working since the year 2010, the only dislocation is shifting from one office to another office, within the Ranga Reddy District. Thus, it cannot be said that guidelines formulated by the government regarding

- 3 - accommodation to the Executive body members of the service association is violated in the case of petitioner warranting interference by this Court.

6.

The writ petition merits no consideration and is accordingly 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 21st June, 2018 Rds