G.Thulaseedharan vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 23701 of 2008(V)


1. G.THULASEEDHARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC

3. K.R. REGHUNATHAN NAIR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.A.SHAJI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :11/08/2008

 O R D E R
                                         K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                   ............................................................................
                                W.P.(C) No. 23701 OF 2008
                   ............................................................................
                                 Dated this the 11th August, 2008



                                          J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is working as Headmaster in the Government School for the

Blind, Thiruvananthapuram. It is stated that he is visually challenged with 100%

disability. His wife is also stated to be visually challenged with 100% disability. The

petitioner is a native of Kottarakkara. It is stated that he is residing in the Headmaster’s

quarters situated in the very same school compound. He has to maintain his wife and

two children. On his request , Ext.P6 order of transfer was passed on 13.07.2006

transferring him to Government School for the Blind, Thiruvananthapuram from the

Government School for the Blind, Ollassa, Kottayam.

2. Apprehending that the request of the third respondent to transfer him to

Government School for the Blind, Thiruvananthapuram dis-placing the petitioner would

be allowed, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 representation dated 29.07.2008 requesting

that the petitioner may be retained at Thiruvananthapuram. Ext.P8 representation is not

disposed of.

3. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:

“i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order

or direction directing the respondents 1 and 2 not to transfer

the petitioner from Government School for the Blind,

Thiruvananthapuram.

ii. declare that Ext. P7 circular is of no application while

considering the request for transfer made by the 3rd respondent;

iii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order

W.P.(C) No. 23701 OF 2008

2

or direction commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to consider

and pass orders on Ext.P8 on merits before taking any decision

on the request for transfer made by the 3rd respondent.

iv. issue such other writ, order or directions as this Hon’ble

Court deems fit to be granted in the circumstances of the case

including cost of the petitioner.

4. In the manner in which I propose to dispose of the Writ Petition, I do not

think it is necessary to issue notice to the third respondent as none of the rights of the

petitioner are being decided as against the third respondent in this Writ Petition.

Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 and 2.

5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the question

whether the petitioner should be retained in the Government School for the Blind,

Thiruvananthapuram or whether the third respondent is entitled to get a transfer to the

Government School for the Blind, Thiruvananthapuram is a matter to be considered by

the second respondent, the Director of Public Instructions. The respective claims of the

petitioner and the third respondent normally would not be considered and decided in a

Writ Petition. The petitioner is entitled to get only relief No.(iii) for the present.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to

consider Ext.P8 representation submitted by the petitioner before deciding the question

whether the petitioner is to be transferred out from the Government School for the

Blind, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner and the third respondent would be free to

put forward all their respective contentions before the second respondent in support of

their respective claims. It is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the

merits of the claim of the petitioner or on the probable defence of the third respondent.

The second respondent shall consider Ext. P8 representation and pass appropriate

W.P.(C) No. 23701 OF 2008

3

orders regarding the transfer. A decision shall be taken by the second respondent as

expeditiously as possible. Till a decision is taken by the second respondent, the

petitioner shall not be transferred from the Government School for the Blind,

Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and

certified copy of the judgment before the second respondent within a period of two

weeks. The petitioner shall also send a copy of the judgment to the third respondent by

registered post and shall produce proof of the same before the second respondent

within a period of two weeks.

K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.

lk