High Court Kerala High Court

K.P.Vally vs The State Of Kerala on 2 April, 2009

Kerala High Court
K.P.Vally vs The State Of Kerala on 2 April, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 10911 of 2009(H)


1. K.P.VALLY, W/O.LATE KUMARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.S.MANILAL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :02/04/2009

 O R D E R
              T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

               -----------------------------------------

                   W.P(C).No.10911 of 2009

               -----------------------------------------

                Dated this the 2nd April, 2009

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner is presently working as Nursing

Superintendent Grade-I, Medical College, Kottayam. She is a

native of Palakkad and belongs to Hindu-Cheruman, a

Scheduled Caste. The petitioner’s husband died on 31.10.2008

due to cancer leaving a large family including four children,

who are pursuing their studies. One post of Nursing

Superintendent Grade-I became vacant in the Taluk Head

Quarters Hospital, Ottappalam on 30.11.2008. Seeking for

appropriate accommodation in the said vacancy, as the

petitioner is to retire on 31.8.2009, she filed Exhibit P4

request which was forwarded to the Government by the

second respondent with Exhibit P5 recommendation. But, to

her surprise, an order has been passed by the Government as

per Exhibit P6 by way of general transfer granting benefit to

various persons, but the case of the petitioner has not been

considered. It is pointed out that even though order of transfer

was passed as per General Order of transfer dated 2.3.2009,

the same has not been implemented so far, in view of the

WP(C).10911/09 2

election to the Lok Sabha and especially, in the light of the

direction contained in Exhibit P7.

2. The petitioner thereafter filed a fresh representation

before the Government as per Exhibit P8. Learned counsel for

petitioner submits that the situations in the family requires her

presence, there especially since her husband expired on

31.10.2008. It is also submitted that she is due to retire from

service on 31.8.2009 and being a member of the Scheduled

Caste community, she is entitled to have a positing in a station

of her choice. It is also pointed out that the children are only

studying and her aged mother is with her. Learned counsel for

the petitioner also submits that the petitioner’s claim for

transfer may be directed to be considered for giving her a

suitable posting, either in Palakkad or at Thrissur, so that she

could be near to her permanent place of residence.

3. Therefore, there will be a direction to consider and

pass orders on Exhibit P8 within a period of six weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE
vgs.