IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2010 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10643 of 2010(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- DR.ARUNKUMAR.A., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF OPTHALMOLOGY,GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. MR.M.V.AMARESAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (B) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DR. DILEEP KUMAR K.V., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF OPTHALMOLOGY, MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. T.T. MUHAMOOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 10643 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T By Ext.P4 transfer order pursuant to general transfers the petitioner, who is working in Government Medical College, Thrissur, has been transferred to Medical College, Kozhikode and the 3rd respondent, who is working in Medical College, Kozhikode, was transferred to Medical College, Thrissur. Against such transfer the petitioner submitted a representation and by Ext.P6 judgment that representation was directed to be considered. Pursuant thereto, Ext.P8 order has been passed by the Government rejecting the representation filed by the petitioner against the transfer. Government took the stand that both the petitioner and the 3rd respondent have completed 3 years of service in their respective stations and that is why they have been transferred. Petitioner contended that this was without taking into account of Ext.P10 & P11 guidelines in W.P.(C)No. 10643 of 2010 -2- respect of general transfer. But the petitioner was not able to point out any provision in Exts.P10 & P11 which prohibit the Government from making transfer of persons who have completed three years in a station. Even otherwise, guidelines are not statutory in character and therefore cannot be any basis for claiming that a Government servant should be or should not be transferred as of right. In so far as it is admitted that the petitioner and the 3rd respondent have completed 3 years of service in their respective stations, I do not find anything wrong in the Government order transferring the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. Therefore there is no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly the same is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/