IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 5504 of 2007(E)
1. K.H. SALIM, AGED 40 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SECRETARY,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH,
3. THE THRIKUNNAPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
4. VIJAYAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.K.DENESAN
Dated :23/02/2007
O R D E R
K.K.DENESAN, J
-----------------------------------------
W.P.(C)NO.5504 of 2007
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2007
JUDGMENT
The petitioner who has been suffered five consecutive
transfers within a span of five months, the last one issued within
an interval of five days, has approached this Court challenging
the arbitrary order passed by the second respondent on
9.2.2007. The impugned proceedings of the second respondent
are the continuation of a series of orders of transfers and
postings issued within a period of five or six months and what is
seen from Ext.P3 order dated 9.2.2007 is that dislocation has
been caused to 118 employees who belong to the category of
Upper Division Clerks.
2. The petitioner was transferred and posted in the Station
where he was working as on 9/2/2007 by proceedings dated
2.2.2007. Ext.P2 proceedings dated 2.2.2007 itself refers to
another order of the same kind issued on 25.1.2007. The
W.P.(C)No.5504/2007 :2:
petitioner, prima facie, seems to be justified in contending that
human problems involved in such frequent orders of transfers
and postings have been totally disregarded and that the second
respondent has been passing orders of transfers one after
another causing heart-burn and hardships to a major section of
the employees of the Panchayat Department, just to please a
favoured group whose dictates are translated into action by that
respondent. Needless to state that such transfers and postings
will not do any good to the administration. It will only cause
unnecessary expenditure to the public exchequer because orders
of transfers and postings ordered not at the request of the
employees will invite claims for travelling allowances and other
expenditure. The state machinery will have to spend time, energy
and money to defend those orders when questioned before Court.
3. This Court had to pass an interim order staying the
operation of Ext.P3 in a writ petition filed by another aggrieved
Upper Division Clerk in W.P.(C)4788/2007.
4. The petitioner was relieved before the order of stay was
served on the concerned authorities. Respondent No.4 who was
W.P.(C)No.5504/2007 :3:
posted as substitute in the place of the petitioner also got
relieved from the Grama Panchayat where he was working as on
9.2.2007.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in the above
circumstances, submits that the petitioner will be satisfied, for
the time being, if this Court directs the first respondent before
whom Ext.P4 representation filed by him is pending, to pass
appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible. I am inclined to
grant the above prayer. Accordingly, after hearing the
Government Pleader also and without issuing notice to the 4th
respondent, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first
respondent to consider Ext.P4, having regard to all relevant facts
and circumstances and to dispose of the same within three weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner
shall produce a copy of the judgment and a copy of the writ
petition before the first respondent for information and
compliance.
K.K.DENESAN, JUDGE
W.P.(C)No.5504/2007 :4:
css
/
W.P.(C)No.5504/2007 :5: