IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 16388 of 2008(A)
1. DR.A.PRASAD, PRESIDENCY INDIRAJI
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR, COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
3. THE PRINCIPAL, CHAVARA GOVERNMENT
4. SMT.RATHI AMMAL, LECTURER (SELECTION
For Petitioner :SMT.SANGEETHA LAKSHMANA
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :23/06/2008
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN,J.
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.16388 of 2008 A
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order of transfer dated
26.5.2008 transferring him from Government College, Chavara to K.K.T.M.
Government College, Pulloott in Thrissur District. By the same Ext.P5 order of
transfer, Smt.Rathi Ammal, the fourth respondent herein, was transferred from
K.K.T.M. Government College, Pulloott to Government College, Chavara.
Petitioner states that he joined Government service as Lecturer on 21.11.1983
and he was served as such at various places. Originally he had declared his
home station as Thiruvananthapuram and later he changed his home station as
Chavara. The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste. The petitioner joined
Government College, Chavara on 4.7.2005.
2. The contention of the petitioner is that he has served
in Government College, Chavara only for 2 years, 10 months and 27 days and
a transfer before the expiry of three years in a particular station , in violation of
the Government orders relating to the transfer of employees, is illegal. The
petitioner also contended that the fourth respondent had changed her home
station twice and, therefore, she is not entitled to get transfer to Chavara.
WP(C) No.16388/2008
2
Relying on Government Orders relating to transfer of employees, the petitioner
also contended that a person belonging to Scheduled Caste shall not be
transferred normally for a period of ten years.
3. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the second
respondent wherein it is stated that the petitioner changed his home station as
Government College, Chavara, Kollam, with effect from 1.5.2005 and he has
completed three academic years of service in his home station with effect from
4.7.2005 to 31.5.2006. It is also pointed out in the counter affidavit that the
home station of the petitioner with effect from 1.6.1989 was Thiruvananthapuram
and he has rendered service in the station of his choice, viz., University
College, Thiruvananthapuram and Women’s College, Thiruvananthapuram, for
a period of ten years. The relevant details are also furnished in paragraph 6 of
the counter affidavit. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the common
interests of all Lecturers are to be protected while making general transfer and
that all relevant facts were taken note of at the time of passing of Ext.P5 order.
4. No mala fides are alleged against any of the
respondents in the Writ Petition. Even assuming that there is an infraction of the
guidelines for transfer to some extent, that cannot be taken as a ground to
entertain a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. I am not
inclined to accept the contention of the petitioner that Ext.P5 order of transfer is
either arbitrary or illegal or that it violates any of the guidelines for transfer of
WP(C) No.16388/2008
3
Government employees. No grounds are made out for the exercise of the extra-
ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The Writ Petition lacks merits and it is liable to be dismissed.
5. The petitioner is always entitled to make a
representation pointing out all his grievances. It is submitted by the counsel for
the petitioner that there were instances where persons having more than ten
years service in a station were not transferred or shifted to other places. All
these are matters to be pointed out in the representation to be filed. If a
representation is filed by the petitioner, without much delay, the authority
concerned shall consider the representation and act in accordance with the
rules and guidelines for transfer and shall pass appropriate orders without delay.
The Writ Petition is dismissed.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
cks