IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 20405 of 2010(A)
1. SHYJU CHERIAN, S/O. CHERIAN CHACKO,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES,
3. DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :09/07/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 20405 OF 2010 (A)
=====================
Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is the husband of a serving military personnel. He
was working as a Pharmacist under the Taluk Headquarters,
Hospital, Kodungallur. Based on Ext.P1 Government Order
providing certain concessions to employees like the petitioner, he
sought an inter district transfer to Pathanamthitta, the home
district. Though by Ext.P2, his claim was allowed, there was no
vacancy to accommodate him, and therefore, he was not posted.
That led to filing of writ petitions resulting in Exts.P3 and P4
judgments. Finally, by Exts.P5 and P6, he was accommodated in
a deputation vacancy at Konny in Pathanamthitta District.
2. While so, on the allegation that the petitioner did not
comply with the direction to report for Sabarimala duty,
disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner resulting in
Ext.P14 order of suspension. In an appeal that was filed by the
petitioner, pursuant to the orders passed by the Government,
Ext.P16 order was passed by the 2nd respondent ordering
reinstatement of the petitioner in Pathanamthitta District itself
WPC No. 20405/10
:2 :
with a rider that the petitioner will not be posted at Konny.
3. The petitioner then submitted representations pointing
out the existence of three vacancies at Kallooppara, Puramattom
and Vennikulam, which according to the petitioner are stations
nearer to his residential place. However, by Ext.P19 order, he was
posted at Malayalapuzha. According to the petitioner, Ext.P19
posting him at Malayalapuzha was issued without complying with
the directions in Ext.P18 judgment requiring the 2nd respondent
to consider the petitioner’s claim for accommodation in any one of
the aforesaid stations. It is on that premise, the writ petition has
been filed.
4. Learned Government Pleader has obtained instructions
in the matter. According to him, Ext.P18 judgment was received
by the 3rd respondent on 24/6/2010, and that, prior to that, on
15/6/2010, Ext.P19 order was issued posting the petitioner at
Malayalapuzha. It is also submitted that before the receipt of
Ext.P18, three vacancies pointed out by the petitioner were filled
up, and it was therefore that the 3rd respondent could not
accommodate the petitioner at the stations pointed out by him.
5. If as stated by the learned Government Pleader, the
WPC No. 20405/10
:3 :
vacancies indicated by the petitioner were filled up prior to the
receipt of Ext.P18 judgment, this Court cannot find fault with the
3rd respondent on the ground that Ext.P19 order was passed
without considering the claim of the petitioner. Therefore, Ext.P19
is unassailable. However, in case, if any vacancy arises in the
nearby stations and if the petitioner is desirous of getting shifted
to those vacancies, it is clarified that it will be open to the
petitioner to make an appropriate application before the 3rd
respondent, in which event, necessary orders will be passed by
the said respondent.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp