JUDGMENT : ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, J. 1. A batch of thirty writ petitions raising identical issues came to be dismissed by a learned single Judge by a common judgment and order dated 25.01.2021. Twelve appeals have been filed against the said common judgment and order dated 25.01.2021. 2. Following the said common judgment and order dated 25.01.2021, another batch of twenty writ petitions, involving the same issues, had been dismissed by a common judgment and order dated 05.02.2021. Four appeals have been filed against the said common judgment and order dated 05.02.2021. 3. W.A.Nos.80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 93, 95, 104, 105, 108, 129 and 135 of 2021 have arisen from the first batch of writ petitions in respect of W.P.Nos.20816, 21307, 20789, 20942, 21084, 21016, 20725, 20808, 21069, 21112, 23885 and 20755 of 2020, respectively. 4. W.A.Nos.130, 139, 142 and 143 of 2021 have arisen from the second batch of writ petitions in respect of W.P.Nos.19242, 20565, 20422 and 23918 of 2020, respectively. 5. We have heard Ms. Kavitha Gottipati, learned counsel for the appellants in W.A.Nos.80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 93, 95, 104, 105, 129, 139, 142 and 143 of 2021, Mr. V.R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the appellants in W.A.No.130 of 2021, and Mr. Seshadri Goalla, learned counsel for the appellants in W.A.Nos.108 and 135 of 2021. We have also heard Mr. S. Sriram, learned Advocate General, and Mr. K. Bheema Rao, learned Government Pleader for Services-III, for the respondents. 6. For the purpose of hearing of the appeals, learned counsel for the parties have referred to the materials on record in W.A.No.81 of 2021, which arises out of W.P.No.21307 of 2020. Therefore, for the purpose of disposal of the appeals, we will rely upon the pleadings in W.P.No.21307 of 2020 and the documents placed in W.A.No.81 of 2021. 7. W.P.No.21307 of 2020 was filed by three petitioners. The case presented by them is that they have been working in schools located in and around Chittoor Municipal Corporation as Secondary Grade Teachers. It is not indicated for how long they have been individually working in the said schools, but a statement is made that the three writ petitioners had completed 2 to 8 years of service in the respective schools. It is not indicated for how long they have been individually working in the said schools, but a statement is made that the three writ petitioners had completed 2 to 8 years of service in the respective schools. The Government had issued Notification in G.O.Ms.No.258, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, dated 07.07.2012, constituting the Chittoor Municipality into larger urban area, namely, Chittoor Municipal Corporation, by merging 14 Gram Panchayats into the said Corporation. The schools in which the writ petitioners are serving are managed by Panchayat Raj & Rural Development Department. It is pleaded that the surrounding villages of Chittoor Municipal Corporation, wherein the schools in which the writ petitioners have been working are located, having been merged with the Corporation, in terms of Section 16 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1994 (for short, ‘the Act of 1994’), the writ petitioners shall be deemed to be employees of Chittoor Municipal Corporation. However, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.53, School Education (Services-II) Department, dated 12.10.2020, and G.O.Ms.No.54, School Education (Services-II) Department, dated 12.10.2020, for rationalization of teachers and transfer of teachers working in Government/Zilla Praja Parishad (ZPP)/Mandal Praja Parishad (MPP) schools in Andhra Pradesh School Education Service and Andhra Pradesh School Education Subordinate Service. Thereafter, in pursuance of the above said G.Os., respondent No.4 – Commissioner and Director of School Education issued a tentative transfer schedule dated 02.11.2020 requesting the District authorities to follow the time schedule for completion of transfers. It is pleaded that without taking decision for merger of the schools into Chittoor Municipal Corporation, the respondents may shift them from their respective places of posting to places outside the Chittoor Municipal Corporation limits on the ground that they had already completed maximum period of tenure. It is also pleaded that the matter relating to merger of schools located in the areas which are already merged into Municipal Corporations is under active consideration of the Government and that the Government had already issued G.O.Ms.No.116, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (D1) Department, dated 10.03.2019 changing the management of ZPP/MPP and Government schools located within the limits of Nellore Municipal Corporation. Accordingly, transfer schedule issued vide proceedings in Rc.No.13029/11/2020-EST 3-CSE dated 02.11.2020 issued by the 4th respondent came to be challenged. Accordingly, transfer schedule issued vide proceedings in Rc.No.13029/11/2020-EST 3-CSE dated 02.11.2020 issued by the 4th respondent came to be challenged. Prayer was also made to direct the 1st, 4th, 7th and 8th respondents not to transfer the petitioners from their respective ZPP/MPP schools situated within the territorial jurisdiction of Chittoor Municipal Corporation till a decision is taken in pursuance of the proceedings in ROC.No.11036/2/2017-JSEC (2299/2017/J3) dated 21.05.2020 issued by the 5th respondent for transfer of Government/ZPP/MPP schools situated within the Municipal Corporation limits into concerned Municipal Corporation. 8. It is submitted by Ms. Kavitha Gottipati, learned counsel for the appellants, that on the prayer of the writ petitioners, interim orders were passed directing the respondents not to disturb the writ petitioners in the batch from their present places of posting and not to include their names in the counselling process in the general transfers of teaching and nonteaching staff being undertaken under G.O.Ms.No.54. 9. The learned single Judge had laid out a chart having four columns under the headings (1) W.P.No., (2) Present station of the petitioners, (3) Proceedings of Director of School Education, Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati fixing schedule for transfers and (4) Letters addressed by concerned authorities of Municipal Corporations/Municipalities/Nagar Panchayats to Commissioner of School Education to take necessary action for merging of ZP & MPP schools located/existing in the Municipal limits into Municipal Management with permission from Panchayat Raj Department. 10. The learned single Judge formulated the following points for consideration: “1. Whether the schools situated in the erstwhile village panchayats which are merged with the Municipal Corporations/Municipalities/Nagar Panchayats are deemed to have been vested on the Municipal Corporations/ Municipalities/Nagar Panchayats in terms of Section 19 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1994. If so, whether the employees working in those schools are entitled to claim that they are the employees of the Municipal Corporations/Municipalities/Nagar Panchayats? 2. Whether the petitioners are governed by G.O.Ms.No.54 dated 12.10.2020 and the proceedings issued by the concerned District Educational Officers, as shown in Column No.4. If so, whether the petitioners be transferred to any other schools in village panchayats under the control of Panchayat Raj Department and Education Department? 3. Whether the proposed transfer of these petitioners to schools under the control of Education Department or Panchayat Raj Department located in village panchayats amounts to violation of fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India? 3. Whether the proposed transfer of these petitioners to schools under the control of Education Department or Panchayat Raj Department located in village panchayats amounts to violation of fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India? If so, whether the proceedings issued by the District Educational Officer shown in Column No.4 of the table mentioned above in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.54 dated 12.10.2020 be declared as illegal and arbitrary?” 11. It appears that in point No.1 aforesaid, Section 19 is wrongly mentioned and it should have been Section 16 of the Act of 1994. All the aforesaid points were decided against the writ petitioners. 12. A perusal of the judgment of the learned single Judge indicates that no counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of the Government. 13. So far as point No.1 is concerned, the learned single Judge held that as long as the writ petitioners are continuing as members of service under the Panchayat Raj Department or Education Department and drawing salary and other benefits therefrom, they are not deemed to be employees under the Municipal Corporation. It is also held that unless the management/ control over those schools is vested in the Municipal Corporations by a specific Government Order, though village panchayats had been merged with the Municipal Corporation by exercising power under Section 3 of the Act of 1994, they cannot become employees of the Municipal Corporation. 14. As regards point No.2, it was observed that although letters were addressed by authorities of Municipal Corporations/Municipalities/Nagar Panchayats to the Commissioner of School Education for appropriate orders, unless the management/control is divested from the Panchayat Raj Department and management is vested in Corporations, the petitioners would not be entitled to claim that they are members of service under the Municipal Corporations. It was held that the petitioners are liable to be transferred from one school to another school which are under the control of Panchayat Raj Department and Education Department, subject to guidelines of transfer contained in G.O.Ms.No.54 dated 12.10.2020. 15. In point No.3, it was held that transfer is an incidence of service and the petitioners have no right to continue to work in the same school and they do not have any right in praesentito pray for a writ of Mandamus. In view of the findings recorded in point Nos.1 to 3, the writ petitions came to be dismissed. 16. Ms. In view of the findings recorded in point Nos.1 to 3, the writ petitions came to be dismissed. 16. Ms. Kavitha Gottipati, learned counsel for the appellants, places reliance on Section 16 of the Act of 1994. It is submitted that the surrounding villages where the schools of the petitioners are located having been merged with the Chittoor Municipal Corporation, in terms of Section 16 of the Act of 1994, they are deemed to be employees of the Chittoor Municipal Corporation and, therefore, they cannot be transferred in terms of transfer policy dated 02.11.2020, as it would affect their right to continue to work within the limits of the Corporation. She further submits that a letter dated 21.05.2020 was issued by the 5th respondent to the 4th respondent requesting him to take immediate action to merge ZPP/MPP schools located/existing in Municipal limits into the Municipal management and the same is under active consideration and, therefore, before any decision is taken on the same, if the writ petitioners are subjected to transfer, they would suffer irreparable loss and injury. It is further submitted that the Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 10.03.2019, bringing all Government and ZPP/MPP schools which are located within the limits of Nellore Municipal Corporation under the administrative control of Nellore Municipal Corporation. Accordingly, the Teaching Staff and Non-Teaching Staff were directed to be given an opportunity to exercise their option as per Section 16(6) of the Act of 1994. It is submitted that as no such order has been issued in respect of other Municipal Corporations, the petitioners, who are serving in schools falling within the territorial jurisdiction of such Municipal Corporations, are discriminatorily treated and as such, their transfer may be kept in abeyance till such time similar orders are issued bringing the schools in which they are working, under the administrative control of the respective Municipal Corporations. 17. Ms. Kavitha Gottipati has further submitted that counselling process for transfer had been completed and the petitioners could not choose their options in the said process and, therefore, they will suffer prejudice, if at this juncture they are transferred. 18. Mr. V. R. Reddy Kovvuri and Mr. Seshadri Goalla, learned counsel appearing for some of the appellants, also endorsed the submissions of Ms. Kavitha Gottipati. 18. Mr. V. R. Reddy Kovvuri and Mr. Seshadri Goalla, learned counsel appearing for some of the appellants, also endorsed the submissions of Ms. Kavitha Gottipati. They also submit that as the issue of merger is pending consideration before the Government, the teachers may be allowed to continue in their present places of posting till the next process of counselling starts as they have lost the opportunity to give their options as per their seniority. 19. Mr. S. Sriram, learned Advocate General, submits that there are three types of institutions, which are Government management institutions, local body institutions and private institutions. It is submitted that there is no dispute that ZPP and MPP schools are under the management of Panchayat Raj Department and that schools under the control of the Corporations are under Municipal management and transfers can take place in respect of schools falling under respective managements. He submits that Section 16 of the Act of 1994 has no application in the instant case as it is not a case where a Municipality ceases to exist and a Municipal Corporation is constituted in its place. He has submitted that this is not a case where a Municipality is replaced by a Municipal Corporation and it is a case where a few abutting villages are included in the Municipal Corporation, thereby making them part of the Corporation. There being no substitution of Municipality, invocation of Section 16 of the Act of 1994 is misconceived. It is contended that merely because some decision was taken with regard to Nellore Municipal Corporation, the same will not attract Article 14 of the Constitution of India in case no such decision as in the case of Nellore Municipal Corporation was taken in respect of other Municipal Corporations, as each Corporation has its own budgetary and infrastructural issues. He, however, submits that decision taken in respect of Nellore Municipal Corporation has been kept in abeyance. Learned Advocate General submits that there is no merit in this batch of writ petitions and the same are liable to be dismissed. 20. He, however, submits that decision taken in respect of Nellore Municipal Corporation has been kept in abeyance. Learned Advocate General submits that there is no merit in this batch of writ petitions and the same are liable to be dismissed. 20. Learned Advocate General also submits that he received instructions from the Government to the effect that in the event of appellants being not successful in the writ appeals, they will be retained in their present places of posting until the commencement of next academic year and between 16.06.2021 and 30.06.2021, counselling will be undertaken for 411 teachers who are involved in the present writ appeals to be accommodated in the left over vacancies. The teachers have completed more than 8 years of service and that is why they have to be transferred and for this purpose, web based counselling will be taken up as per the procedure laid down in G.O.Ms.No.54 dated 12.10.2020. He submits that the teachers will be given option to choose from the left over vacancies. He concedes that as the range of options would be limited, the Department is willing to give them one more opportunity. He has submitted that there are 497 schools that have become teacher-less and the teachers in this batch of cases will be posted to those schools through counselling. Whenever the next round of general counselling is taken up, these teachers will be given one more opportunity to exercise their options in such transfer counselling, so that they would have a wider range of options available including preferential categories. He has further submitted that though, normally, the teachers who do not complete two years of service would not be eligible to exercise option for transfers, in the instant case, the Department is willing to give them such an option if the teachers are prepared to go and work in the teacher-less schools at present. It is further submitted that consequent upon transfer of present batch of teachers, it will not be difficult to fill up the vacancies either on deputation or on adjustment basis. 21. It is further submitted that consequent upon transfer of present batch of teachers, it will not be difficult to fill up the vacancies either on deputation or on adjustment basis. 21. Section 19 of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982, provides that educational institutions shall be classified as (a) State institutions, that is to say, educational institutions established or maintained and administered by the Government; (b) Local authority institutions, that is to say, educational institutions established or maintained and administered by a local authority and (c) private institutions, that is to say, educational institutions established or maintained and administered by any body of persons registered in the manner prescribed. 22. G.O.Ms.No.54 dated 12.10.2020, amongst others, provides that Director of School Education shall take action to call for applications for transfer of teachers through online system and conduct web counselling duly obtaining options. The guidelines for transfer of teachers working in Government, Zilla Parishad and Mandal Parishad Schools during academic year 2020-21 are filed at Page 112 of the writ appeal papers. Apart from others, it is provided that transfers shall be effected from within the present management in which the teachers are working and that transfers and postings of Headmasters/Teachers shall be done on the basis of entitlement points as specified in the guidelines. 23. A perusal of the above would go to show that all the transfers shall be processed only by applications filed and options exercised through an online process. The writ petitioners prayed for and were granted an interim order not to include their names in the counselling process for transfer and as such, they did not exercise their options in the counselling process. Therefore, the writ petitioners cannot contend now that because they could not exercise their option in the counselling process, if they are transferred, they will suffer prejudice because of option for choosing posting being severely circumscribed. 24. Section 16(1) and Section 16(6) of the Act of 1994, to which reference was made by the learned counsel for the appellants, read as follows: 16. 24. Section 16(1) and Section 16(6) of the Act of 1994, to which reference was made by the learned counsel for the appellants, read as follows: 16. Transitional Provisions:- Where a Municipality ceases to exist and a Municipal Corporation is constituted in its place under this Act, - (1) all property, all rights of whatever kind, used, enjoyed or possessed by, and all interests of whatever kind owned by, or vested in, or held in trust by or for the Municipal Council, with all rights of whatever kind used, enjoyed or possessed by the said Council as well as all liabilities legally subsisting against the said Council, shall, on and from the commencement of this Act and subject to such directions as the Government may, by general or special order, give in this behalf, pass to the Corporation; xxxxxx (6) notwithstanding this Act, every officer or employee who, immediately before such commencement was in the service of the Municipality shall be deemed to be an officer or employee of the corporation: Provided that, - (i) the terms and conditions applicable to such officers and employees consequent on their absorption in the service of the Corporation shall not be less favourable than those applicable to such employees immediately before such commencement, as pay and allowance, leave, pension, gratuity, provident fund and age of superannuation; and (ii) the service rendered by any such officer or other employee under the Municipality upto such commencement shall be deemed to be in service under the Corporation and he shall be entitled to count that service for the purpose of increments, leave, pension or provident fund and gratuity: Provided further that any officer or other employee serving in the Municipality shall give an option to be exercised within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed either to be absorbed in the service of the Corporation or to be retained in the service constituted, under Section 72 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 (Act VI of 1965), or to be retrenched from the service of the Municipality on such retrenchment benefits as may be prescribed.” 25. It is not in dispute that the writ petitioners are serving under the management of Panchayat Raj Department. The contention advanced is that in view of Section 16 of the Act of 1994, they are deemed to be employees working under the control of Municipal Corporations. It is not in dispute that the writ petitioners are serving under the management of Panchayat Raj Department. The contention advanced is that in view of Section 16 of the Act of 1994, they are deemed to be employees working under the control of Municipal Corporations. Learned single Judge held that Section 16 of the Act of 1994 is applicable only in case where a Municipality ceases to exist on its upgradation as Municipal Corporation and that Section 16 has no application when adjourning villages are merged into the Corporation. 26. Section 16(6) of the Act of 1994 provides that every officer or employee who immediately before commencement of the Act of 1994 was in the service of the Municipality shall be deemed to be an officer or employee of the Corporation. As such, the same is not relatable to the writ petitioners. 27. On a perusal of Section 16 of the Act of 1994, we find ourselves in agreement with the finding of the learned single Judge that the contention of the writ petitioners that the schools where they are working being located within the Chittoor Municipal Corporation, they are deemed to be employees of the Chittoor Municipal Corporation cannot be accepted. We are in respectful agreement with the observation of the learned single Judge that unless the management of the schools is divested from the Panchayat Raj Department and vested in the Corporations, by way of passing a specific order, the writ petitioners cannot claim that they are members of service under the Municipal Corporation. 28. By the letter dated 21.05.2020, on which much emphasis has been placed by the learned counsel for the appellants, the Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration requested the Commissioner of School Education Department to take immediate necessary action for merging of ZPP and MPP Schools located/exiting in the Municipal limits into the Municipal Management after obtaining permission from the Panchayat Raj Department. It is indicated therein that these schools are monitored/guided by the School Education Department and they are yet to be transferred from Panchayat Raj Department to Municipal Administration Department. The aforesaid letter rather goes to show that merging of ZPP and MPP schools located/existing in the Municipal limits into the Municipal Management has not taken place. It is indicated therein that these schools are monitored/guided by the School Education Department and they are yet to be transferred from Panchayat Raj Department to Municipal Administration Department. The aforesaid letter rather goes to show that merging of ZPP and MPP schools located/existing in the Municipal limits into the Municipal Management has not taken place. No right accrues in favour of the writ petitioners by reason of the fact that the said letter is pending consideration and, therefore, it cannot be countenanced that till such time a decision is taken, the writ petitioners cannot be transferred from their places of posting. 29. Learned Advocate General has submitted that though an order dated 10.03.2019 was passed in respect of Nellore Municipal Corporation, bringing all the Government and ZPP/MPP schools which are located within the limits of the said Municipal Corporation under the management of the said Municipal Corporation, the same has not been given effect to, which is contested by the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners. Even if such an order was issued in respect of Nellore Municipal Corporation, the writ petitioners cannot contend that the respondents acted discriminately in not passing similar orders in respect of other Municipal Corporations. The Principal Secretary, School Education (Services-II) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, issued a Memo dated 13.11.2020, wherein reference was made, amongst others, to the order dated 10.03.2019 with regard to the Nellore Municipal Corporation as also the letter dated 21.05.2020 about which a reference was made in the earlier part of this judgment. In the said Memo, which was produced during the course of hearing, it is stated that no proposal was received by the Commissioner, Panchayat Raj Department, regarding feasibility for merging of schools and, therefore, no action can be taken at that juncture on the proposals submitted by the Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration for merging of all schools functioning under Panchayat Raj Department existing in the limits of Municipal Corporation, Municipality, Nagar Panchayat into the Municipal management. 30. In view of the above discussion, we find no good ground to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge. 31. Before parting, we would like to observe that notwithstanding the dismissal of the writ appeals, the respondents would scrupulously follow the submissions and concessions of the learned Advocate General, based on instructions received, which are recorded in Paragraph 20 of the present judgment. 32. 31. Before parting, we would like to observe that notwithstanding the dismissal of the writ appeals, the respondents would scrupulously follow the submissions and concessions of the learned Advocate General, based on instructions received, which are recorded in Paragraph 20 of the present judgment. 32. The Writ Appeals are, accordingly, dismissed, subject to observations as made in Paragraph 31 above. 33. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.