IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 20369 of 2007(Y)
1. KRISHNANKUTTY, S/O.PARANGODAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF
... Respondent
2. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH,
3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH,
4. SECRETARY, GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
For Petitioner :SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
Dated :03/07/2007
O R D E R
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J.
-------------------------
W.P.(C) No.20369 of 2007 Y
-------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2007.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is an Upper Division Clerk working in
Thenkara Grama Panchayath. It is a new panchayath formed by
bifurcating Mannarkkad Grama Panchayath. Earlier, the petitioner
was working in Mannarkkad Grama Panchayath. Pursuant to the
bifurcation, some of the staff working in the parent panchayath,
including the petitioner, were allotted to the newly formed
panchayath. Being aggrieved by this posting, the petitioner
preferred Ext.P3 representation before the Director of Panchayaths.
The petitioner approached this court with W.P.(C)No.34575/06
seeking a direction for disposal of Ext.P3 representation. This court
directed the said officer to consider the representation by Ext.P4
judgment. His representation was considered and disposed of by
Ext.P5 order stating that the grievance raised by the petitioner in
Ext.P3 will be considered at the time of general transfer of the
employees of the Panchayath Department. Now, this writ petition is
filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to
transfer the petitioner from Thenkara Grama Panchayath to
Mannarkkad Grama Panchayath. A further direction is sought for
to implement the decision contained in Ext.P5.
W.P.(C) No.20369 of 2007
:: 2 ::
2. Since the transfer is made to a neighbouring
panchayath, no serious prejudice is caused to the writ petitioner
by the said transfer. Since the 2nd respondent has held out a
promise to consider the grievance of the petitioner at the next
general transfer, the same shall be done if the general transfer is
not already over. The 2nd respondent shall inform the petitioner
why he was not transferred, if the general transfer is already
completed.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
(K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR)
JUDGE
sk/
//true copy//
P.S. To Judge