IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 20719 of 2008(N)
1. M.K.DEVARAJ, 47 YEARS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE GENERAL MANAGER
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :10/07/2008
O R D E R
V.GIRI,J.
-------------------------
W.P ( C) No. 20719 of 2008
--------------------------
Dated this the 10th July, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is a Telecom Mechanic presently
stationed at Periya Telephone Exchange in
Mananthavady. He is a permanent resident of
Kozhikode. Apparently, he was originally
appointed in Kozhikode Secondary Switching Area
in 1992. Then he sought for a transfer to Kannur
Exchange which was given to him. He again
sought a transfer back to Kozhikode district which
was also given to him. Thereafter, the petitioner
was transferred to Thirumeni Telephone Exchange
and he again made a request for a transfer to
Kozhikode district in terms of Rule 38 of the P & T
Manual Volume which provides forfeiture of
seniority on transfer. Petitioner’s request was
directed to be considered by the Department as
per the Judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.6521
W.P ( C) No. 20719 of 2008
2
of 2008. It ultimately resulted in Exhibit P4 order.
Exhibit P4 order is an elaborate order that deals with
the contentions of the petitioner. It refers to the fact
that petitioner had misrepresented the facts before this
Court and he filed earlier writ petition alleging that
his wife was no more. It is now seen that his wife
Sobha Devarajan had actually moved the Judicial First
Class Cherthala for maintenance from the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
averment is that his first wife is no more and second
wife is apparently not staying with him.
2. I am not inclined to interfere with Exhibit P4
order as such. Nevertheless taking note of the fact that
petitioner is looking after his son, the respondents may
sympathetically consider the case of the petitioner for a
posting in Kozhikode, if it is made again after a period
of six months. I say so because learned counsel for the
respondents submit that there are already several
persons in the waiting list seeking a posting in
Kozhikode district. But the respondents may
W.P ( C) No. 20719 of 2008
3
nevertheless consider the case of the petitioner in the
manner aforementioned provided the petitioner renews
his request after a period of six months and in such a
case decision on his request may be taken without
reference to Exhibit P4 order as such.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
(V.GIRI, JUDGE)
ma
W.P ( C) No. 20719 of 2008
4
W.P ( C) No. 20719 of 2008
5