Krishna Pillai R. vs State Of Kerala Represented By Its on 21 January, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 1837 of 2010(D)


1. KRISHNA PILLAI R., JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES,

3. SOOSAMMA A., JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT,

4. APPUKUTTAN, ASSISTANT TALUK SUPPLY

5. MANMADHAN, ASSISTANT TALUK SUPPLY

6. K.RAJAN, ASSISTANT TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :21/01/2010

 O R D E R
                         K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
               ------------------------------------------------------------
                     W.P(C) NO: 1837 OF 2010 D
                -----------------------------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 21st January, 2010.

                                    JUDGMENT

The petitioner, Junior Superintendent, District Supply Office,

Kollam challenges Ext.P3 transfer order by which he has been

transferred from Kollam to Trivandrum. According to the

petitioner, he had joined duty at Kollam only on 30.11.2009

pursuant to Ext.P1 proceedings dated 26.11.2009. His case is that

there are other persons working at Kollam who have been

continuing in the said post for more than three years. The

petitioner contends that vacancies are expected to arise on

31.3.2010 at Kollam. Therefore, according to him it is not at all

necessary to shift the petitioner from Kollam to Trivandrum.

According to the petitioner Ext.P3 has been issued only to favour

the third respondent and is therefore unsustainable.

2. The Government Pleader on instructions submits that the

third respondent is a person who has lost her husband recently.

She is also a person who suffers from various ailments that require

constant medical treatment at Kollam itself. Therefore, on

compassionate grounds, she was given a posting at Kollam. The

petitioner has only been shifted to Trivandrum which is not a far off

WPC 1837/2010 2

place. Anyway since the petitioner has detailed his grievances in

Ext.P5 and has pointed out the vacancies that are expected to arise

by the end of March 2010, appropriate action can be directed to be

taken on Ext.P5, in accordance with law.

3. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed

of directing the second respondent to consider Ext.P5 in

accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon as

expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one

month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment

K. SURENDRA MOHAN
Judge
jj