IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18619 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANILKUMAR D., S/O. DAMODARAN PILLAI, AGED 34 YEARS, LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR, NOW WORKING AT VETERINARY DISPENSARY, ARIKULAM, QUILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. JOLLY C.RAJ, LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR, VETERINARY DISPENSARY, KANGARAPPADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. ANNIE JOHN, LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR, VETERINARY DISPENSARY, NATTAKAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY G.P.SRI.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.18619 of 2010 (B) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 16th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Live Stock Inspector working in Kozhikkode District. According to the petitioner, by Ext.P3, he sought an inter district transfer to Thiruvananthapuram District. It is stated that overlooking his claim, applications made by respondents 4 & 5 were allowed. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the inter district transfers allowed to respondents 4 & 5 and seeks a direction for consideration of his claim. 2. Having regard to the fact that inter district transfer allowed in respect of respondents 4 & 5 were in 2008, I am not persuaded to entertain the challenge against those inter district transfers at this distance of time. Be that as it may, the petitioner says that his request made by Ext.P3 is still pending consideration of the 2nd respondent. Having regard to the case of the petitioner regarding the pendency of Ext.P3 application, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider the said WP(C) No.18619/2010 -2- application and pass orders thereon, provided the application is still pending. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg