JUDGMENT : Battu Devanand, J. This Writ Appeal is filed against by the order, dated 23.07.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.17656 of 2025. 2. Both the parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the writ petition for convenience. 3. The facts leading to filing of this Appeal are herein under :- i) The Petitioner No.1 was working in Korlakunta Gram Panchayat, Galivedu Mandal, Y.S.R.Kadapa District, while Petitioner No.2 was working at Cheemala Cheruvupalli Village, Galivedu Mandal, Y.S.R.Kadapa District. They were appointed pursuant to the notification for recruitment of Panchayat Secretaries issued in the year 2019 vide G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 19.07.2019 in Y.S.R. Kadapa District. In the year 2022, the then existing 13 Revenue Districts were bifurcated into 26 Districts and the erstwhile Y.S.R.Kadapa District was divided into Y.S.R.Kadapa and Annamayya Districts. Considering the request of the Director, GSWS, Vijayawada for necessary orders for positioning and transferring of the required number of functionaries based on the category of Village/Ward Secretaries, the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.5 Department of Grama Sachivalayams and Ward Sachivalayams, dated 12.06.2025. In the said G.O., while issuing certain guidelines on this aspect, Principles For Positioning and Transfers of Functionaries are framed. Clause (v) of the said Principles is extracted herein under: “v) for all the transfers including those for positioning of prescribed number of functionaries at each secretariat, the District collectors of erstwhile Districts/appointing authorities shall be the competent authorities”. ii). By virtue of these instructions, after bifurcation of the erstwhile Kadapa District, the District Collector of the Y.S.R Kadapa District has to conduct the counselling for transfers in the entire erstwhile Y.S.R Kadapa District. Accordingly, the District Collector conducted counselling through the District Panchayat Officer, Annamayya District and accordingly, issued proceedings transferring the 1 st petitioner to Adapur Gram Panchayat, Nandaloor Mandal, Annamayya District and the 2 nd petitioner to Korlakunta Village, Galiveedu Mandal, Annamayya District. The grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioners being natives of Y.S.R Kadapa District, they have opted three different places in Kadapa District. But, without considering their options made in the online counseling, the 4 th respondent issued the impugned proceedings contrary to the aim and object of the State Government in issuance of G.O.Ms.No.5, dated 12.06.2025. Hence, W.P.No.17656 of 2025 is filed. But, without considering their options made in the online counseling, the 4 th respondent issued the impugned proceedings contrary to the aim and object of the State Government in issuance of G.O.Ms.No.5, dated 12.06.2025. Hence, W.P.No.17656 of 2025 is filed. After hearing both sides, the learned Single Judge of this Court, dismissed the said Writ Petition vide order, dated 23.07.2025. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Appeal has been filed. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners/appellants and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 5. The contention of the learned counsel for the writ petitioners is that while issuing G.O.Ms.No.5 Department of Grama Sachivalayams and Ward Sachivalayams, dated 12.06.2025, the intention of the State Government was to effect transfers through the District Collectors of the erstwhile Districts in order to accommodate the persons who are working outside their native Districts in their native districts. As such, the order of the 4 th respondent is illegal and unsustainable in law. The learned counsel further contends that the learned Single Judge without considering this aspect in proper perspective dismissed the writ petition. Hence, he sought to set aside the same and requested to allow the Writ Appeal. 6. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that as per Clause 5(ii) of the transfer policy under G.O.Ms.No.23 Finance(HR-I-PLG & POLICY), Department, dated 15.05.2025, the erstwhile District alone would be considered as unit and the cadres would be localized under the Presidential order. Therefore, the learned Government Pleader would contend that the erstwhile District is taken as unit and the counselling by the District Panchayat Officer, Rayachoti would not be factor of relevance as the transfer orders were issued by the competent authority i.e., the District Collector of the erstwhile Y.S.R.Kadapa District. Hence, he contends that there is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge in dismissing the Writ Petition and sought to dismiss the present Writ Appeal. 7. Having considered the submissions of the respective counsels appearing on both sides and on perusal of the material available on record, in our considered view, there is some substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the writ petitioners. 8. Admittedly, in the year 2022, the State Government has bifurcated the existing 13 Revenue Districts into 26 Districts. 7. Having considered the submissions of the respective counsels appearing on both sides and on perusal of the material available on record, in our considered view, there is some substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the writ petitioners. 8. Admittedly, in the year 2022, the State Government has bifurcated the existing 13 Revenue Districts into 26 Districts. For effecting transfers in the District, the State Government has entrusted the administrative power of the transfer policy to the erstwhile District Collector of the concerned District. It appears that though the erstwhile District is bifurcated and separate District Administration is under the control of the different District Collectors, the erstwhile District collector is authorized to effect transfers by conducting counseling in the jurisdiction of entire erstwhile district, to enable for accommodating those persons, who were working at different places prior to bifurcation of the Districts to their native districts. Otherwise, there is no necessity to entrust that counseling and transfers work to the erstwhile District Collector. The Annamayya District Collector can conduct counseling and effect transfers within the jurisdiction of the Annamayya District. So, it appears that the aim and object of the State Government of issuing G.O.Ms.No.5 Department of Grama Sachivalayams and Ward Sachivalayams, dated 12.06.2025 is not strictly followed by effecting transfers of the petitioners. Admittedly, the options made by the petitioners in online counselling have not been considered. The reason for non-consideration also is not placed before the learned Single Judge or before this Division Bench except saying that as per guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.5 Department of Grama Sachivalayams and Ward Sachivalayams dated 12.06.2025, the transfers were effected to the petitioners. 9. We are not satisfied with the stand taken by the respondents on this aspect. It appears that the counselling and transfers of the writ petitioners have taken place contrary to the aim and object of G.O.Ms.No.5 Department of Grama Sachivalayams and Ward Sachivalayams dated 12.06.2025, issued by the respondents. Accordingly, in our considered view, the order of the learned Single Judge is liable to be set aside. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioners are working at the places where they were posted pursuant to the proceedings, dated 30.06.2025 and some employees may be working in the places where the writ petitioners have opted. 10. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioners are working at the places where they were posted pursuant to the proceedings, dated 30.06.2025 and some employees may be working in the places where the writ petitioners have opted. 10. In view of that factual position, in our considered view, it is appropriate and desirable to direct the 4 th respondent to consider the options made by the writ petitioners at the time of online counselling and accommodate them in the Y.S.R Kadapa District to meet the interest of justice. 11. For the aforesaid reasons, this Writ Appeal is allowed with the following directions:- i) The order of the learned Single Judge, dated 23.07.2025 is hereby set aside. ii) The District Collector, erstwhile Y.S.R Kadapa District shall examine the options submitted by the petitioners during online counselling and accommodate them within the jurisdiction of Y.S.R Kadapa District. iii) This exercise shall be completed within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.