Mukkelli Suresh, v. General Manager (P And A) Bdl.

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO Writ Petition No.4968 of 2001 ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the action of the respondents in transferring him by way of proceedings No.BDL/6074/2000 dt.20.12.2000 without accepting his resignation letters dt.22.12.2000, 12.01.2001, 01.03.2001 and without relieving him from the parent department as illegal, void and for consequential direction to the respondents to accept his resignation.

2) The petitioner's case is that he is an Engineering Graduate in Computers and he has been working as Deputy Manager, Information Technology Group (ITG), Bharath Dynamics Limited since 26.02.1999 and he completed his probation and performing his duties to the satisfaction of his office superiors. While-so, he was transferred from Computer Department to Production Engineering Department (PED) on 20.12.2000 by the 2nd respondent. In protest against the transfer, he submitted his resignation through Senior Manager(CIM) to the General Manager, Bhannur. He also submitted leave letters to the Senior Manager (CIM) and Manager (CIM). Since his resignation letter and leave letters were not forwarded to the General Manager, BDL, Bhannur Unit, he sent his resignation on 12.01.2001 by telegram directly to the 1st respondent. His further case is that he was appointed as Deputy Manager (ITG) in Computers Integrated

Manufacturing (CIM) and his past and present experience is relating to computer software and hardware development and therefore, transferring him entirely to the irrelevant department i.e, Production Engineering Department is illegal and arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. He thus prayed to issue writ of Mandamus as stated supra.

3) When the matter came up for hearing today, there is no representation for the petitioner.

4) Learned Standing Counsel for respondents Sri D.Ravi Shankar Rao, is present and he would submit that though initially the resignation tendered by the petitioner was not accepted, subsequently his resignation was accepted by the respondent company and he was relieved on 12.04.2001 and as such no cause survives in the instant writ petition and hence the writ petition may be dismissed.

5) Recording the above submission made by learned standing counsel for respondents across the Bar, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J Date: 09.08.2016 scs