AP High Court Orders Fresh Counselling Of Over 800 Govt Officials In Two Districts Allegedly Transferred On Recommendation Of MPs/MLAs

The Andhra Pradesh High Court directed fresh counselling for over 800 Village Agricultural Assistants in two districts who had questioned their mass transfer on the ground that it seemed to be influenced by recommendations of public representatives which was against the transfer policy.In doing so the court said that manner in which orders were passed gave the impression of a parallel administration going against the set transfer policy. The petitioners claimed that while counselling options were given to them, yet the transfer orders were issued on the same date establishing that point of giving options for posting for only for name sake, and the orders were passed on recommendations of public representatives i.e. MPs/MLAs. Justice Nyapathy Vijay in his order observed that on June 30, an order was passed by the government transferring 455 candidates from Kurnool district and 475 functionaries in Krishna district.The court noted:"A reading of the letters issued by the public representatives would show that a number of functionaries were recommended for transfer and the letters also mention the transferred places of posting of the recommended functionaries.The number of functionaries recommended for transfer in Kurnool and Krishna Districts are exceptionally high. As regards other Districts, the numbers are not so high to the extent of vitiating the transfers...Though the learned Government Pleader contended that the transfers were effected as per the executive instructions issued vide G.O.Ms.No.5 dated 12.6.2025, however, did not dispute the fact that the individuals named in the letters of public representatives are transferred coincidentally to the very same place in the two districts referred above. The court said that while transfer is the incidence of service and posting of individuals is best left to the administration however it is another thing when postings in mass scale would be at the "instance of the public representatives dehors the executive instructions". "Such an approach would give an impression of parallel administration and abdication of duty to adhere to the transfer policy issued by Respondent No.1 vide G.O.Ms.No.23 dated 15.05.2025 read with G.O.Ms.No.5 dated 12.06.2025,” the court said.The court observed that majority of transfers in the erstwhile Kurnool and erstwhile Krishna Districts were effected on account of the letters issued by public representatives, and so it cannot be said to be in public interest.The court thus opined that transfers need to be re-considered by the Respondent-authorities in tune with the transfer policy. It directed the Appointing Authority to conduct fresh counselling and effect transfers in erstwhile Kurnool and erstwhile Krishna Districts in terms of G.O.Ms.No.5. BackgroundThe petitioners argued that transfers were effected without reference to seniority list and totally at the instance of the MPs and MLAs. The petitioners further submitted that the letters issued by public representatives were not recommendations per se and were in the form of a dictum which particularly specified the postings of the employees. On the contrary, the State argued that the transfers were effected according to the established transfer policy and that there was no bar in the administration to consider recommendations of public representatives.Findings:At the outset, the Court reiterated that it cannot interfere in transfers issued in public interest even if transfer guidelines are violated. However, with respect to the present case, it said,“The piquant situation in this cadre is that all the employees have been appointed as Village Agricultural Assistants Grade-II in the year 2019 through DSC and this is the first transfer after they joined the department and therefore, there is a greater degree of caution and transparency required by the transferring authorities. The transfer policy does not mention as to what is the criteria that is being adopted for determining the inter se seniority, lottery system etc. unlike in other departments, where the individuals have been appointed on different dates.”While public representatives, being the bridge between the executive and employees, can espouse the cause of employees seeking transfer and can also recommend their transfer, the Court observed that recommendations to the effect vitiating the very transfer guidelines, as in the present case, cannot be sustained.“The attempt of the Respondent No.1 to bring in transparency in the transfers and quell favouritism apparently did not succeed in the case of erstwhile Kurnool and erstwhile Krishna Districts as the District Collector/Appointing Authority merely approved the recommendations without any reference to G.O.Ms.No.5 dated 12.6.2025 and remained a mute witness. The attempt of the Respondent No.1 to bring in transparency and minimise arbitrariness through the executive instructions vide G.O.Ms.No.5 dated 12.06.2025 in erstwhile Kurnool and erstwhile Krishna Districts was...

AP High Court Orders Fresh Counselling Of Over 800 Govt Officials In Two Districts Allegedly Transferred On Recommendation Of MPs/MLAs

Saahas Arora

Tags