IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 20TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3677 of 2009(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JALAJAKUMARI, SENIOR INSTRUCTOR, I.T.I.(W), CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR DT. BY ADV. SRI.M.K.DILEEP KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE TRAINING DIRECTOR,INDUSTRIAL TRAINING DEPARTMENT,THAICAUD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SMT.M.B.BABY, SENIOR INSTRUCTOR, I.T.I, MALAMPUZHA.PO, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. SMT.SHANTY.C.S, JUNIOR INSTRUCTOR, I.T.I.CHALAKUDY.PO,THRISSUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, ADV.SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.3677/2009-K ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 9th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is presently aggrieved by Ext.P1 order by which the petitioner has been transferred to I.T.I., Malampuzha. There was an earlier writ petition wherein the petitioner was one of the contesting respondents. The copy of the judgment in the said writ petition is produced as Ext.P2 herein. The petitioner is the sixth respondent therein. The operative portion of that judgment is as follows. “4.In my considered opinion, the decision taken by the Director in Ext.P4 to the extent it cancels the petitioner's transfer to Chalakkudy is not sustainable in law and was not called for. The Director has in Ext.P4 held that transfers on administrative grounds can be ordered only by the State Government. Reference is made in Ext.P4 to paragraph 29 of Ext.P5 Government order. I am of the view that the said reasoning also is faulty and not sustainable in law. Ext.P5 only lays down the norms to be followed by the transferring authorities including the Joint Director of Industrial Training when transfers are effected by him. Paragraph 29 of Ext.P5 Government order only reserves power with the Government to deviate from the norms prescribed therein and to order transfer in relaxation of the norms. The only restriction is that such power can be exercised by the Government only on W.P.(C) No.3677/2009 -:2:- administrative grounds. I therefore hold that Ext.P4 to the extent it interferes with the petitioner's transfer from I.T.I Malampuzha to I.T.I (W), Chalakkudy is set aside. The respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to continue at I.T.I (W), Chalakkudy pursuant to the order of transfer effected as per Ext.P2. 5. A reading of Ext.P4 indicates that the dispute raised by the fifth respondent has not been considered by the Director when he passed Ext.P5. Therefore, there will be a further direction to the Director of Industrial Training to consider the representation submitted by the fifth respondent afresh after hearing respondents 5, 6 and 7. I further clarify that the Director shall not while passing fresh orders, interfere with the petitioner's transfer and posting at the I.T.I, Chalakkudy under Ext.P2. The Director shall pass revised orders in the matter within two months from today.” 2. After considering various competent claims the Director, in implementation of the above directions of this Court, has passed Ext.P1. Mainly, the contention raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner was not due for transfer whereas the second respondent herein had earlier been working in Chalakkudy for a period of five years before her transfer to Malampuzha which was not considered by the first respondent while issuing Ext.P1. W.P.(C) No.3677/2009 -:3:- 3. It is also submitted that the accommodation given to the third respondent is also not done properly. Going by Ext.P1, the first respondent has considered the directions in Ext.P2 judgment before passing the same. It is a very detailed order passed after assessing the various competent claims. Therefore, at this stage, I am not satisfied that the said order is passed in an irregular manner. The learned counsel for the petitioner then submitted that there is an existing vacancy in I.T.I Mala and the petitioner may be allowed to seek accommodation in that vacancy. If the petitioner files appropriate representation before the first respondent within ten days from today, the same will be considered and appropriate decision will be taken in the matter within a further period of two weeks thereafter. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms