IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 19364 of 2011(U) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- KANCHANA.J., W/O. SUKUMAR.R., LECTURER, GOVERNMENT POLY TECHNIC COLLEGE, EZHUKONE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHAN LAL SRI.SAIJU S. SRI. PRASAD T. RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 1. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, GOVT. OF KERALA, PADMAVILASOM ROAD, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 23. 3. SRI. AZAR M.A., LECTURER, SREE RAMA GOVT. POLY TECHNIC COLLEGE, THRIPRAYAR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 021. 4. SRI. BADHARUDEEN V.K., LECTURER, GOVT. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, VECHOOCHIRA, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689 645. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.ALTHAF FOR R3 SMT. NISHA BOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. SRI.PHILIP T. VARGHESE FOR R4. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.19364/2011 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF ORDER No.EC-3/4381/11/DTE DTD. 14.7.11 ISSUED BY R2. EXT. P2 : COPY OF ORDER No.EC-3/4381/2011 DTD. 10.2.11 ISSUED BY R2. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.19364 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2011 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by Ext.P1 order by which the petitioner is ordered to be transferred from GPTC, Ezhukone to GPTC, Vechoochira. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was promoted and posted as Lecturer in Computer Engineering in the present Institution at Ezhukone as per proceedings dated 11.02.2011. She was working there previously from 01.06.2010. 4. It is alleged in the writ petition that the proceedings Ext.P1 has been issued on a representation said to have been filed by the respondents 3 and 4. Finally it is pointed out that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Kollam and her family is W.P.(C)No.19364/2011 -2- settled at Kollam. It is stated that by exerting undue influence, the respondents 3 and 4 have obtained the sanction. 5. Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that when the 3rd respondent was promoted, there was an open vacancy at Ezhukone but that was not given. Thereafter even though a request for approval was made, that also was not considered and again the 3rd respondent filed a representation. After considering the same, Ext.P1 order has been passed. It is pointed out that the petitioner is junior to both the respondents 3 and 4. 6. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 1st respondent, the following facts have been pointed out. The 3rd respondent was promoted as Lecturer in Computer Engineering as per proceedings dated 29.07.2010 of the 2nd respondent and he was posted in the Sree Rama Government Polytechnic College, Thriprayar and he joined duty therein on 31.07.2010. During General Transfer 2011, he submitted an application for transfer with Government Polytechnic College, Ezhukone as the first W.P.(C)No.19364/2011 -3- choice. But that request was not considered even though there was an open vacancy in the said College as he had not completed three years in Thrissur. The 4th respondent who was promoted as Lecturer in Computer Engineering and joined duty at Government Polytechnic College, Vechoochira on 23.11.2009 also submitted transfer request during General Transfer 2011 with Government Polytechnic College, Cherthala as first choice. That was also rejected as he had not completed three years. In the meanwhile, the petitioner was promoted and posted at Ezhukone. It is pointed out that after the completion of General Transfer 2011, as both the respondents 3 and 4 are seniors to the petitioner, they again submitted transfer requests. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the transfer can be made only once in a year during General Transfer and therefore Ext.P1 is an out of turn transfer. 8. A reading of Ext.P1 shows that transfers have been made in respect of various parties whose names are mentioned therein and it is not an exceptional case. Therefore, I am not W.P.(C)No.19364/2011 -4- agree with the contention raised by the petitioner that transfer can be made only once in a year in the month of February. The facts pleaded by the petitioner and pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 show that the petitioner is junior to the respondents 3 and 4 and even when the 3rd respondent obtained promotion, there was an open vacancy at Ezhukone but he was not given posting in the said vacancy. It is only after rejecting his request for transfer, the petitioner was granted. While the request was pending, the petitioner was given promotion. 9. In a matter like this, evidently, this Court cannot sit in appeal over the various reasons pointed out by the authorities and this Court cannot act as an appellate authority. Of course, competent claims have been raised by various authorities. There is no plea that the transfer has been ordered without jurisdiction or the order amounts to abuse of process. Unless it is shown that the order of transfer is vitiated by arbitrariness, the petitioner will not be able to succeed. W.P.(C)No.19364/2011 -5- I do not find any reason to interfere with the order. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is residing in Kollam and therefore she may be considered for transfer to a nearby station. It is open to the petitioner to point out any vacancy in the nearby Institution which will be duly considered by the 2nd respondent. This writ petition is dismissed. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp