P.K.Santhamma vs Director Of Animal Husbandry on 27 June, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19527 of 2008(Y)


1. P.K.SANTHAMMA , ATTENDANT, VETERINARY
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY
                       ...       Respondent

2. DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OFFICER

3. DR. M.P. VIJAYAKUMAR, PRODUCTION MANAGER

4. HARIHARAN PILLA, SENIOR ACCOUNTANT

5. P.K.RAJAN, ATTENDANT

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.PADMAKUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :27/06/2008

 O R D E R
                       V.GIRI, J.
        -------------------------
          W.P.(C).No.19527 of         2008 Y
        -------------------------
          Dated this the 27th day of June, 2008.


                     JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is an attendant at the

Central Hatchery, chengannur has been transferred

to Ezhupunna under Ext.P2 order. According to the

petitioner, the order is vitiated by mala fides

and the details of the same is stated in the writ

petition. She has sought for cancellation of the

order of transfer on several grounds.

2. In my view, the petitioner’s grievance

merits serious consideration by the District

Animal Husbandry Officer, the 2nd respondent

herein. The petitioner submits that though she

has been relieved pursuant to Ext.P2, she may not

be disturbed from the quarters. She has submitted

Ext.P4 representation before the 2nd respondent and

it is pending. In my view, the request of the

petitioner is reasonable.

3. In the result, the writ petition is

disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to

consider and pass orders on Ext.P4, in accordance

with law, within a period of one month from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

W.P.(C).NO.19527/08

:: 2 ::

4. If the allegations raised by the

petitioner in Ext.P1 are correct, the 2nd

respondent shall take necessary steps to see

that no injustice is meted out to the

petitioner. She is an attendant and it will not

be, in the normal course, justified to require

an attendant to travel a distance of 100 kms.,

every day, especially when the incumbent is a

female. Orders shall be passed within one month

from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. Petitioner shall not be evicted from

the quarters occupied by her in the meanwhile.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of

this judgment along with a copy of the writ

petition before the 2nd respondent for

compliance.

Sd/-

(V.GIRI)
JUDGE
sk/

//true copy//

P.S. To Judge