Neelapu Purushottama Rao vs Navodaya Vidyalaya Samithi & Others

Ashish Kalia, Member J

Through Video Conferencing:

Heard Sri T.P. Acharya, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri N. Srinatha Rao, learned counsel for the respondents.

The applicant is working as an Office Superintendent in the respondent's organization at Andaman & Nicobar Islands, which is a very hard station.

The respondents have called for options from employees for effecting annual transfers for the year 2020-21. The applicant applied for Yanam and

accordingly the respondents have issued a proposed transfer list on 03.05.2021, showing the applicant as posted at Yanam and the Respondent No.9

at Visakhapatnam. Later, the respondents revised the proposed transfer list on 01.06.2021, posting the applicant at Visakhapatnam and the

Respondent No.9 at Yanam. The applicant claims that since he has worked in a very hard station, he has to be given choice posting. However, the

respondents have changed the order without intimating the reasons for doing so. The applicant claims that the Respondent No.9 has been favoured in

issuing the transfer order.

Sri N. Srinatha Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the change in the proposed transfer order was due to the

reason that the applicant is alleged to be involved in a fraud. He, however, submits that the final transfer list has not yet been OA No.386/2021

released and up to 30.06.2021, no transfer order would be issued. He has also submitted that the order dated 6.5.2021 issued by the 5th respondent

stating that no employee shall represent against any transfer order has been superseded and an opportunity would be given to the concerned

employees to represent against any transfer order. Therefore, he submitted that at this juncture of time, no interim order needs to be passed.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that a representation has been submitted by the applicant on 02.06.2021 to the respondents. The said

representation has not yet been disposed of till date.

In view of the above, the respondents shall dispose of the representation of the applicant within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a

copy of the order, by issuing a reasoned and speaking order. The applicant is given liberty to revert to this Tribunal in case he is aggrieved with the

disposal of his representation, within one week. Till the disposal of representation and the one week period granted to the applicant to approach the

Tribunal, the respondents shall not post anyone at Yanam in the post of Office Superintendent.

With the above direction, the O.A. is disposed of at the admission stage. No order as to costs.