IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2009 / 12TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 16374 of 2009(N) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- K.G.USHA KUMARI, JUNIOR SUPT.KOLLAM COMMITTEE OFFICE, KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, CHAMAKKADA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR.M.V.THAMBAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, SRM ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. ABDUL NAZAR, JUNIOR SUPT.SUB OFFICE, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, TIRUVALLA. * 3. THE CHAIRMAN, LOCAL COMMITTEE OFFICER, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, SRM ROAD, ERNAKULAM. *NAME & ADDRESS OF R3 IS CORRECTED AS: THE CHAIRMAN, LOCAL COMMITTEE OFFICE, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, CHAMAKKADA, KOLLAM. (CORRECTED AS PER ORDER DTD. 3/07/2007 IN I.A.NO.7761/2009) R1 TO R3 BY ADV. MR. RENIL ANTO, SC, MR.KOSHY GEORGE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/07/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.16374/2009 N APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF MEDICAL BOARD CERTIFICATE DTD. 22/12/87. P2: COPY OF GOVT. CIRCULAR NO.130558/SD1/82/GAD DTD. 10/03/1983. P3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E1-23161/2008 (1) DTD. 4/06/2009. P4: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E1-23161/08 DTD. 24/06/2009. P5: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E1/536/06/KC DTD. 25/06/2009. P6: COPY OF THE TREATMENT CARD. P7: COPY OF THE LEAVE APPLICATION DTD. 28/06/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE: ANNEXURE “A”:COPY OF THE RESULTANT ORDER DTD. 24/06/2009. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 16374 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT This writ petition was filed challenging the petitioner's transfer from Kollam to Tripunithura. By virtue of the interim orders passed by this Court, the petitioner was retained at Kollam till the first respondent passed a revised order transferring and posting her to Punalur. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that the reliefs sought for in this writ petition have become infructuous. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order transferring her to Punalur, it will be open to her to challenge the same in other appropriate proceedings. The petitioner shall join duty at Punalur where she has now been posted without prejudice to her right to challenge the order transferring her to Punalur in other appropriate proceedings. The writ petition is closed with the above observation. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. mn.