IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2011 / 4TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20266 of 2011(G) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- 1. JAYARAJAN.K.A,HEALTH INSPECTOR, P.H.C.VETTOM,MALAPPURAM. 2. ANILKUMAR.K.G,HEALTH INSPECTOR,P.H.C. THIRUVALI,MALAPPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.BOSE SRI.VINOD MADHAVAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695001. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 20266/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF LETTER DATED 22/11/2010. P2: COPY OF CIRCULAR DATED 06/12/2010 OF THE DIRECTOR CONCERNING THE GENERAL TRANSFERS OF 2011 P3: COPY OF APPLICATION ON 20/12/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER. P4: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE PRELIMINARY LIST DATED 17/05/2011. P5: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE LIST DATED 17/05/2011. P6: COPY OF INFORMATION DATED 01/06/2011. P7: COPY OF OBJECTION DATED 31/05/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER. P8: COPY OF LETTER DATED 01/06/2011 ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL OFFICER, TO THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, MALAPPURAM. P9: COPY OF REQUEST DATED 01/06/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P10: COPY OFF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE FINAL LIST VIDE ORDER NO.13892/11. DHS DATED 21/07/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.20266 of 2011 ---------------------------- Dated 26th July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioners are working as Health Inspectors under the Health and Family Welfare Department. Ext.P5 is the provisional list for general transfer in respect of Health Inspectors for the year 2011. Admittedly, in Ext.P5, the names of the petitioners were included. Ext.P5 provides for preferring appeals against the proposal in the provisional list. Availing the said opportunity the petitioners have preferred Exts.P7 and P9 respectively. The contention of the petitioners is that Ext.P5 though dated 17.5.2011 was, in fact, published only on 31.5.2011, as is obvious from Ext.P6. Therefore, the contention of the petitioners is that 15 days' time should have been calculated with effect from 31.5.2011. Evidently, Ext.P10 list finalising Ext.P5 was published only on 21.7.2011. Thus, it is obvious that the final list was published after two months from the dates of Exts.P4 and P5 viz., 17.5.2011. Even if it is taken that the provisional transfer orders were issued only on 31.5.2011 then also, Ext.P10 final list was published more than one month thereafter. The contention of the petitioners is that there is nothing in Ext.P10 which would suggest that the objections raised by WP(C).No.20266/2011 2 the petitioners were properly considered by the respondents before issuing Ext.P10. In a general transfer order no one can expect inclusion of such details as to why the claim of a particular person was allowed or disallowed. Therefore, the failure to incorporate such reasons in Ext.P10 cannot be a reason for this Court to interfere with Ext.P10. Assuming that the grievances raised by the petitioners were not properly taken into consideration prior to the publication of Ext.P10, the course open to the petitioners is to file appeals against Ext.P10 before the Government. Therefore, it will be open to them to approach the Government by preferring appeals against Ext.P10 in case they are desirous to do so. It will also be open to them to reiterate their contentions taken in Exts.P7 and P9 in such appeals. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to prefer appeals in case they are desirous to do so within 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In case the petitioners file such appeals before the first respondent, the first respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a period of one month thereafter with notice to the petitioners and also to the persons who are likely to be affected in case of passing orders in WP(C).No.20266/2011 3 favour of the petitioners. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS