High Court Kerala High Court

Sheeba.A. vs The Director on 3 February, 2011

Kerala High Court
Sheeba.A. vs The Director on 3 February, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 3450 of 2011(E)


1. SHEEBA.A., W/O.A.M.SALEEM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

4. VASANTHA KUMARI.S., PLRINCIPAL,

5. DR.SHEEJA.S., PRINCIPAL,

6. KRISHNA KISHORE V., PRINCIPAL,

7. BIJU.L.P., PRINCIPAL, GOVT.HIGHER

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.SASIDHARAN UNNITHAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :03/02/2011

 O R D E R
               T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                W.P.(C). No.3450/2011-E
              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2011

                    J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is presently working as Principal

of Government Higher Secondary School, Kattoor,

Irinjalakuda in Thrissur District. She is a native of

Thiruvananthapuram District. She was promoted as per

Ext.P1 order dated 27/03/2010. She filed an

application for transfer pointing out various vacancies

in Thiruvananthapuram District. Her first choice was

Government H.S.S., Attingal; second choice was

Government H.S.S., Vakkom and; third choice –

Government H.S.S., Elamba. Ext.P2 is the copy of the

application which was submitted pursuant to the

invitation of application for general transfer. Ext.P3

is the guidelines for transfer.

2. The list prepared thereafter, as per Ext.P4

shows that the petitioner was proposed to be

transferred to the school of her first choice i.e.

Government H.S.S., Attingal. It is pointed out that in

the light of the seniority as well as other conditions

of the norms, she was proposed to be transferred to

W.P.(C). No.3450/2011
-:2:-

Attingal. The case of the petitioner is that

thereafter, at the final stages, an alteration has been

made in the list even though all the authorities have

concurred with the benefits granted to the petitioner.

It is pointed out that respondent Nos.4 to 7 have been

benefited by the final orders issued. The petitioner

has raised several contentions in the writ petition

alleging extraneous reasons for the refusal to grant

the request of the petitioner.

3. The petitioner has already moved the

Government by filing Ext.P8 representation. In the

light of the urgency shown by the petitioner, there

will be a direction to the Government to take a

decision on Ext.P8 with notice to the petitioner and

respondent Nos.4 to 7 within a period of one month from

the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The

petitioner will produce a copy of the writ petition

along with a copy of the Judgment before the Government

for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as

above. No costs.

Sd/-

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

ms
\\TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE