Dr. A. Vijayalakshmi vs The State Of Telangana on 17 April, 2025

Telangana High Court

Dr. A. Vijayalakshmi vs The State Of Telangana on 17 April, 2025

          THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

                    WRIT PETITION No.19339 of 2024
ORDER:

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is

filed seeking the following relief:

“…to issue Writ, Order or Direction one more particularly in the
nature of Writ of Mandamus,
a. Declaring the action of the Respondents more specifically
Respondent No. 2 to 4 in conducting the process of transfers,
including the counselling, in violation of G.O. Ms. No. 80 dated
03.07.2024 issued by Respondent No.1 as being bad, arbitrary,
illegal and violative of article 14, 16, 19 & 21 of constitution and
b. Consequentially direct the Respondent No. 2 to 6 to not affect the
transfers of the Petitioner as per counselling conducted on
18.07.2024…”

2) Heard Sri R. Anurag, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,

the learned Additional Advocate General, on behalf of respondent Nos.1

to 5, and Sri A. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.6

and 7.

3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is

presently discharging her duties as Professor, Pediatrics in respondent

No.6 Hospital. While so, respondent No.1 issued G.O.Ms.No.80 dated

03.07.2024, duly notifying the transfer and posting of employees by

lifting the ban on transfer orders, and according to the said G.O., the

transfers were to be affected between 05.07.2024 and 20.07.2024. The
2
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

said G.O. reads that only 40% of the working cadre strength would be

considered for the purpose of transfer and accordingly, a list of persons

who shall be compulsorily transferred should be communicated through

the official portal, duly indicating the details of the said personnel along

with the period for which, the said persons have been serving in the

same station/posting. Further, the employees to be compulsorily

transferred have to exercise their option of preferences and to avail any

other exemption under the said G.O.

3.1) It is further submitted that the petitioner’s name was not included

in the said compulsory transferable list that was circulated and

uploaded on the official website. As such, the petitioner did not exercise

her option for transfer. While that being so, on 16.07.2024 and

17.07.2024, respondent No.4, in a high-hand and illegal manner, issued

a circular calling for the entire cadre of professors to attend the transfer

counseling session on 18.07.2024, contrary to G.O.Ms.No.80. As such,

the said action of the respondents in issuing the said circular on the

eleventh-hour itself would clearly show that there is a mala fide intention

on the part of the department, and only to favour a few persons and to

safeguard their men, the said circular was issued. It is further

submitted that for any process to be considered as free and fair,

sufficient amount of time ought to have been given to the candidates, so
3
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

as to exercise their preferences of the posting or places, to effectively

conduct their duties. However, the said process has been completely

thrown to air by the respondents, who never followed the process of

putting the petitioner on prior notice and have proceeded with

conducting the counseling process and concluded it on 18.07.2024, by

transferring the petitioner to M.G.M. Hospital, Warangal, without

extending the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.No.80, for special circumstances

under medical and spouse grounds. Further, the process of exercising

options or preferences was not followed in its true letter and spirit,

thereby, depriving the petitioner an opportunity for filling the application

form as prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.80, and as such, she was denied an

opportunity to exercise her options, along with others, to opt for the

place of transfer and avail any other criteria for transfer as per

G.O.Ms.No.80. Therefore, on the ground of discrimination and unequal

opportunity, the irregular transfer counseling process is liable to be set

aside.

3.2) It is further submitted that the exemptions available under

G.O.Ms.No.80 dated 03.07.2024 were being wrongly claimed and

considered of those persons who are not the office bearers and even

assuming that their claims are genuine, the verification process could

not have been completed within 24 hours. As such, the transfer process
4
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

adopted by respondent Nos.2 to 4 suffers from extreme illegality.

Further, posting a list of compulsory transferable personnel and

conducting the counseling by ignoring the said list at their own will and

wish, without affording an opportunity of raising objections amounts to a

violation of principles of natural justice and is liable to be interfered with

by this Court. It is further submitted that the cadre strength of the

department of pediatrics consists of sixty three posts, and as such, going

by G.O.Ms.No.80 dated 03.07.2024, only 40% of the total strength

should have been called for counseling by following compulsory transfer

list released by respondent No.4. However, the circular issued by

respondent No.4 goes contrary to G.O.Ms.No.80 dated 03.07.2024,

wherein, the entire cadre strength was called for transfer counseling. As

such, on this ground also, the transfer process is liable to be set aside.

Therefore, it is prayed to allow the present writ petition.

4) On the other hand, the learned Additional Advocate General

appearing for the respondents submitted that the Government has

issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.80 dated 03.07.2024, lifting ban on transfers

from 05.07.2024 to 20.07.2024, and subsequently, extension orders

were issued in G.O.Ms.No.85 dated 20.07.2024, extending the same till

30.07.2024. As per paragraph 4 (B) of G.O.Ms.No.80 dated 03.07.2024,

no person shall be retained beyond four years of service in a particular
5
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

station as on 30.06.2024. However, the employees retiring on before

30.06.2025 shall not be transferred, even if they complete four years of

service, unless he or she opts for a transfer. Further, as per paragraph

6(B), station means place (city, town, village) of actual working for the

purpose of transfers and not office (or) institution.

4.1) It is further submitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.80 dated

03.07.2024, a list of long-standing employees who have completed four

years and above as on 30.06.2024, along with request transfers, has

been prepared in category of Professor in the specialty of Pediatrics and

it was found that there are twenty three candidates who have completed

four years and above of service, including the petitioner, and their names

were enlisted in the list of long-standing employees liable for compulsory

transfer in the Professor cadre, wherein, the petitioner was shown at

Sl.No.19. The petitioner, along with other doctors, was called for

counseling vide circulars dated 16.07.2024 and 17.07.2024, and they

attended the same on 18.07.2024 wherein the petitioner opted her

choice for place of posting at M.G.M. Hospital, Warangal, and also signed

in the counseling sheet also.

4.2) It is further submitted that three doctors have submitted their

office bearer certificates for exemption from General Transfers 2024.

They are the office bearers of the Telangana Government Doctors
6
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

Association, having been elected for the term 2024-26. The Committee

constituted for transfer and posting of employees as per G.O.Ms.No.27

dated 06.07.2024, has conducted the counseling on 18.07.2024, and

after verifying and examining the office bearers certificates submitted by

the those three Professors as per the guidelines issued in Circular

Memo.No.20914/SWI/A2/2012-1 and Circular Memo.No.20914/SWI/

A2/2012-2 dated 30.06.2012, and also Government Memo.No.2550623-

A/206/A1/HRM.1/2024-1 dated 12.07.2024, the Committee decided to

exempt those three doctors shown at Sl.Nos.7, 10 and 11, who are in the

Department of Pediatrics in the post of Professor of Pediatrics, from the

General Transfers 2024. As such, there is no deviation from the above

rules.

4.3) It is further submitted that the petitioner’s name was included in

the long-standing list as per the station seniority, as she has completed

six years two months of service in the present station in all cadres.

Accordingly, the Government issued transfer orders to the eighteen

Professors in the Pediatrics Department who have attended the transfer

counseling and opted for place of posting during the counseling,

including the petitioner herein, who has been transferred to M.G.M.

Hospital, Warangal. As such, there is no illegality in the conduct of
7
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

transfer counseling and issuance of posting orders. Therefore, it is

prayed to dismiss the present writ petition.

5) Learned counsel for respondent No.7 submitted that as per

G.O.Ms.No.411 dated 31.07.2012, the Telangana Doctors Association

has been recognized by the erstwhile Government of Andhra Pradesh,

and the Government also issued Memos dated 26.06.2012 and

30.06.2012, granting the benefit of exemption from transfers to all the

office bearers of the recognized associations, for a period of six years.

Subsequently, after formation of the state of Telangana, the Government

issued Memo dated 11.06.2018, duly extending the recognition by the

Government of Telangana. It is further submitted that no election were

conducted after 2018, and for the first time, in pursuance of the

directions of this Court dated 25.11.2022 in W.P.Nos.26896 and 38614

of 2022, the learned Advocate Commissioners conducted the elections of

the Association at the central office level in respect of all units on

29.04.2024, in a fair and transparent manner. Thereafter, the results

were declared on 16.05.2024, whereby, respondent No.7 was elected as

the President of Telangana Doctors Association. Therefore, respondent

No.7 and the other office bearers of the Association are entitled for

exemption from transfers despite their completing more than four years

of service at a particular station i.e., at respondent No.6 Hospital. As
8
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

such, his name was excluded from the transfer counselling list and he,

along with the two employees who are the office bearers of the Telangana

Doctors Association, were not subjected to transfer.

6) This Court has taken note of the rival submissions made by

learned counsel for the respective parties.

7) To adjudicate the lis, this Court feels it necessary to refer/extract

relevant portions of the guidelines issued by the Government vide

G.O.Ms.No.80, dated 03.07.2024, to be followed while effecting transfers.

a) Para 4 (B) states that no person shall be retained beyond 4 years

of service in a particular station as on 30th June, 2024. However, the

employees who are retiring before 30th June, 2025 shall not be

transferred even if they have completed four years of service, unless they

make a specific request for their transfer.

b) Para 4 (C) states to ensure that there is no dislocation of the work,

not more than 40% of the employees in any manner shall be transferred.

c) Para 7 stipulates the procedure for transfers:

i) The HoDs/Competent Authority shall publish the list of incumbents
working category wise and cadre wise, in all units under their jurisdiction,
along with place and duration.

9

PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

ii) Similarly, all clear vacancies shall also be published before seeking
options from the employees.

iii) The Competent Authority shall publish a list of employees to be
compulsorily transferred.

iv) The Competent Authority may obtain upto five options for
preferential places of transfers from the employees in the prescribed proforma
in Annexure-II. However, the Departments may modify the proforma according
to their specific requirements.

vii) To ensure transparency, all the notifications shall be published
online or on the office notice board.

8) As can be seen from the record, pursuant to issuance of

G.O.Ms.No.80, dated 03.07.2024, respondent No.4 had prepared

department-wise Compulsory Transfer List. Insofar as Pediatrics

Department, to which the petitioner belongs to, is concerned, the cadre

strength of the said Department is 63 and working strength is 44, out of

whom, 23 candidates in Pediatrics Department including petitioner have

completed the service of four years and above. Out of them, the

respondents have identified 40% of the working strength i.e. 18 persons,

who are having longstanding service at one place i.e. Hyderabad.

Further, the respondents have transferred the petitioner from Nilofar

Hospital, Hyderabad, to MGM Hospital, Warangal, by including her name

in the longstanding list duly giving exemption to the Office Bearers,

whose names were included in the 40% Compulsory Transfer List at
10
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

Sl.Nos.7, 10 and 11, in terms of Para 6 (C) of G.O.Ms.No.80, dated

03.07.2024, which reads as under:

“The standing instructions on the transfers of office bearers of employees
unions recognized, by the Government, as issued in Circular Memo
No.20914/S.W.I/A2/2012-1 of G.A. (Services Welfare.I) Department, dt.26-06-
2012 read with Circular Memo.No.20914/S.W.I/A2/2012-2 OF G.A. (Services
Welfare.I) Department, dated 30.06.2012, shall be followed scrupulously.”

Admittedly, the petitioner has not challenged para 6 (C) of G.O.Ms.No.80,

dated 03.07.2024, which provides for exemption to the office bearers of

employees Union, relying on which, the authorities have considered and

retained the persons shown at Sl.Nos.7, 10 and 11 in the 40%

Compulsory Transfer List, which ultimately resulted in transfer of the

petitioner.

9) Further, though the petitioner has specifically contended that she

stands at Sl.No.19 and does not come within the purview of 40%

Compulsory Transfer List, but in compliance of Para 4 (C) of

G.O.Ms.No.80, dated 03.07.2024, the authorities have transferred the

petitioner in view of the fact that she has completed 6 years and two

months of service at Hyderabad and therefore falls under Para 4(B) of

G.O.Ms.No.80, dated 03.07.2024, which stipulates that no person shall

be retained beyond four years of service in a particular station as on

30.06.2024.

11

PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

10) Further, as can be seen from the material annexed to the vacate

stay petition filed by the learned Additional Advocate General, during the

transfer counseling, 21 candidates, including the petitioner herein, have

participated wherein the petitioner has exercised the only option for

place of posting at ‘MGM, Warangal’, and the authorities have also

considered same and transferred her to the place of her choice i.e. MGM

Hospital, Warangal.

11) In this context, it is relevant to state that in Union of India v. S.L.

Abbas 1, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under:

“6. An order of transfer is an incident of Government service.
Fundamental Rule 11 says that “the whole time of a Government
servant is at the disposal of the Government which pays him and he
may be employed in any manner required by proper authority”.

Fundamental Rule 15 says that “the President may transfer a
Government servant from one post to another”. That the respondent is
liable to transfer anywhere in India is not in dispute. It is not the case
of the respondent that the order of his transfer is vitiated by mala fides
on the part of the authority making the order, – though the Tribunal
does say so merely because certain guidelines issued by the Central
Government are not followed, with which finding we shall deal later.
The respondent attributed “mischief” to his immediate superior who had
nothing to do with his transfer. All he says is that he should not be
transferred because his wife is working at Shillong, his children are
studying there and also because his health had suffered a setback

1 (1993) 4 SCC 357
12
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

sometime ago. He relies upon certain executive instructions issued by
the Government in that behalf. Those instructions are in the nature of
guidelines. They do not have statutory force.

7. Who should be transferred where, is a matter for the
appropriate authority to decide. Unless the order of transfer is vitiated
by mala fides or is made in violation of any statutory provisions, the
court cannot interfere with it. While ordering the transfer, there is no
doubt, the authority must keep in mind the guidelines issued by the
Government on the subject. Similarly if a person makes any
representation with respect to his transfer, the appropriate authority
must consider the same having regard to the exigencies of
administration. The guidelines say that as far as possible, husband and
wife must be posted at the same place. The said guideline however does
not confer upon the Government employee a legally enforceable right.”

12) Similar view was taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its

subsequent judgment in State Bank of India v. Anjan Sanyal 2 holding

as under:

“4. An order of transfer of an employee is a part of the service
conditions and such order of transfer is not required to be interfered
with lightly by a court of law in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction
unless the court finds that earlier the order is mala fide or that the
service rules prohibit such transfer or that the authorities, who issued
the order, had not the competence to pass the order….”

13) From the above settled proposition, it is clear that an order should

not be interfered with, unless the same is vitiated by mala fides. In the

2 (2001) 5 SCC 508
13
PK, J
W.P.No.19339 of 2024

case on hand, the petitioner is unable to establish any mala fide on the

part of the official respondents either in transferring the petitioner or in

retaining the unofficial respondent. Therefore, the impugned transfer

order does not warrant any interference of this Court.

14) In view of the above, this Court does not find any merit and the

writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

15) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition,

shall stand closed. No costs.

___________________________
PULLA KARTHIK, J
Date: 17.04.2025.

GSP/sur

Issue C.C. today