The division bench also issued a notice to Arun Bhatia to either be present in the court or be represented by a lawyer.

The division bench was responding to petitions filed by the Express Citizens Forum, Pune Corporator Nitin Jagtap, citizens Shekhar Tawde and Sunanda Das and others who claimed that the decision of the State Government to transfer Arun Bhatia on March 13, 1999, was malafide, as he took charge as Pune municipal commissioner only on March 6, 1999.

Though the State did not file an affidavit in the case, State Advocate General C J Sawant put up a strong defence of the State Government's action, questioning the locusstandi of the citizens in the case. Citing the judgment in the Vishnu Bhagwat case as an example, Sawant said that transfers were a State Government prerogative and the only person who can challenge it was the person involved; in this case, Arun Bhatia himself. He also cited the Supreme Court judgment in the Ramesh Kini case, where he pointed out to the court that public outcry could not be mistaken with public interest.

Though Bhatia has been made a party to the petition filed by Sunanda Das, he has been asked to be present in court.

On their part, various counsels for the petitioners, like A R Anturkar for petitioners Express Citizens Forum and Shekhar Tawde, argued that the court cannot foreclose the public interest aspect in the transfer of persons in public posts. Soli Doctor, counsel for Sunanda Das, argued that the judgments have no application in this case, as citizens have a right to good administration. He also argued that the State Government is bound by its own rules not to transferofficers within a year of their posting and in case it had to effect a transfer, the reasons for it had to be recorded. He claimed that the State Government has made no such remarks.

In their order, the division bench noted that the State Government should file an affidavit on the issue based on the locus standi and maintainability of the arguments put forward. The bench permitted the State Government and its Chief Secretary to file a reply affidavit within three days and asked that the petitioners be given a copy of it. He also asked that records pertaining to the case be kept ready for a possible perusal of the court.

The Chief Justice also directed that a notice be issued to Bhatia and posted the next hearing for 23rd March.