High Court Kerala High Court

T.G.Sasi vs The Rubber Board on 17 May, 2010

Kerala High Court
T.G.Sasi vs The Rubber Board on 17 May, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 13704 of 2010(K)


1. T.G.SASI, FARM OFFICER
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE RUBBER BOARD, REP BY ITS SECRETARY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY (P&A)

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RAFFEEKH.K

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :17/05/2010

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                     ================
                W.P.(C) NO. 13704 OF 2010 (K)
                =====================

             Dated this the 17th day of May, 2010

                         J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is a Farm Officer working under the respondents.

By Ext.P1 order, he has been transferred to Chethackal in

Pathanamthitta District. It is this order, which is under challenge.

The first contention raised is that he has not completed 3 years

tenure at the present station, and therefore, is not liable to be

transferred at this stage. The other contention raised is that there

is no sanctioned post at Chethackal.

2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the

respondents. It is stated that the petitioner has joined the present

post on 23/4/07 and therefore, has completed three years

continuous service at the present station. It is also stated that he

has been transferred to Central Experiment Station, Chethackal

against an existing vacancy of Farm Officer. Therefore, the non

availability of a sanctioned post at transferred place is also

incorrect. His contention that the transfer is by way of punitive

measure is denied by the respondents. Added to all this, it is also

stated that his substitute who has been transferred from

WPC No. 13704/10
:2 :

Chethackal has already joined the post on 23/4/2010, and

therefore, the petitioner has to be relieved.

In view of all the above, I am satisfied that there is

absolutely no merit in the writ petition. It is only to be dismissed

and I do so.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp