The Union Of India v. S.K. Mahesekar,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND SIXTEEN (21.04.2016) PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL WRIT PETITION No.13372 of 2016 Between:

Union of India, rep.by its Secretary to the Government, Department of Atomic Energy, Anushakti Bhavan, CSM Marg, Mumbai and 2 others ..... PETITIONERS AND S.K.Mahesekar and another .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr.B.NARAYANA REDDY Asst.Solicitor General Counsel for Respondents No.1 :

Mr.K.V.SATYANARAYANA, Senior Counsel, For Mis Anitha Swain The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY &

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL WRIT PETITION No.13372 of 2016 JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) The ad interim order granted for limited period and being extended from time to time by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad (for short "the Tribunal"), granting status quo in relation to the transfer of respondent No.1, is questioned in this writ petition.

Sri B.Narayana Reddy, learned Asst.Solicitor General of India, submitted that respondent No.1 is working in Hyderabad from 1984 onwards and that he has no justification in resisting the transfer after more than three decades.

Since the O.A. is pending before the Tribunal, we refrain from expressing any opinion on the submissions of the learned counsel. However, since the order impugned in this writ petition is ad interim in nature, we do not find it appropriate to interfere with the same at this stage. Considering the fact that the dispute before the Tribunal pertains to the transfer of respondent No.1, it is not only appropriate, but also expedient to dispose of the O.A by the Tribunal, as early as possible. Therefore, without interfering with the impugned order, respondent No.2 is requested to dispose of the O.A.No.021/01318/2015, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within one month from the date receipt of a copy of this order.

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.16727 of 2016, filed by the petitioners for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.

________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J __________________

M.S.K.JAISWAL,J Date: 21.04.2016 Dsr