High Court Kerala High Court

Union Of India vs B.Padmakumar on 30 November, 2009

Kerala High Court
Union Of India vs B.Padmakumar on 30 November, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 27349 of 2009(S)


1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                      ...  Petitioner
2. THE CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL,
3. THE POST MASTER GENERAL,
4. THE POST MASTER GENERAL,

                        Vs



1. B.PADMAKUMAR, S/O.V.BHASKARAN NAIR,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR

 Dated :30/11/2009

 O R D E R
              KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
                    ---------------------------------------------
                        W.P. (C) NO. 27349 OF 2009
                    ---------------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 30th day of November, 2009


                                  JUDGMENT

Kurian Joseph, J.

Ext.P2 order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal,

Ernakulam Bench in O.A. No.267 of 2009 is under challenge in this Writ

Petition, at the instance of the department – respondents. The simple issue

pertains to the transfer of the original applicant/respondent herein.

2. We find that as per Ext.R2 order, the department has granted

transfer to the respondent within the central region itself. According to the

respondent, the same has been done without request. It is further

submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that inter regional

transfers are generally made on requests and intra regional transfers are

made without any request. Be that as it may, it is submitted that in view

of Ext.R2 intra regional transfer, the respondent has no grievance as of

now. It is also submitted that the respondent intends to apply for transfer

to Thiruvananthapuram during the next general transfer.

W.P.(C) NO. 27349/2009 2

3. The main apprehension of the petitioners is that Ext.P2 order of

transfer would be taken as compliance of the directions of the Tribunal.

There is also an apprehension that Ext.R2 order would stand in the way of

the department effecting transfers in accordance with the transfer norms.

We do not think that there is any basis for such an apprehension. If norms

are there, so long as the norms are not interpreted by any competent

authority to be followed in a particular manner and in a particular case, it

is certainly open to the department to take appropriate action in accordance

with the transfer norms and practice. Therefore, neither Ext.R2 order nor

Ext.P2 order of the Tribunal nor this judgment will stand in the way of the

department considering the case of its employees, at the time of general

transfer, in accordance with the rules, norms and practice.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

(KURIAN JOSEPH)
JUDGE

(C.T. RAVIKUMAR)
JUDGE

sp/

W.P.(C) NO. 27349/2009 3

KURIAN JOSEPH
&
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.

W.P.(C)NO.27349/2009

JUDGMENT

30th November, 2009

W.P.(C) NO. 27349/2009 4