IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.DENESAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH MARCH 2007 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1928 WP(C).No. 8256 of 2007(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SOMASHEKHARAN PILLAI, GODOWN KEEPER, KERALA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.MATHEW RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KERALA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. ASSISTANT MANAGER, STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, THAKAZHY. BY ADV. SRI.MAJNU KOMATH, SC, K.S.W.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/03/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.K. DENESAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 8256 OF 2007 G = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 13th March, 2007 J U D G M E N T Heard counsel for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is working as Godown Keeper in the Kerala State Warehousing Corporation. The Managing Director of the 1st respondent Corporation had issued an order vide Ext. P3 dated 13-10-2006 transferring Godown Keepers from one station to another. The petitioner was also included in Ext. P3 order. Though Ext. P3 order was implemented in the case of others, the petitioner was not relieved pursuant to Ext. P3 order. This was done taking into account the request made by him. He had been working as Godown Keeper at Thakazhi. It is contended that he had to take leave for personal and other grounds and when he reported for duty he could know that he has been relieved as per Ext. P4 order dated 5-3-2007 on implementation of Ext. P3 order. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3. According to the petitioner, he should have been allowed to continue for some more time and the WPC No.8256 /2007 -2- present relieving order has been issued without taking into consideration his physical ailments. Medical certificates have been produced as exhibits in the writ petition. 4. I do not think that this Court is justified in taking into consideration medical certificates and other personal problems highlighted by the petitioner and interfere with the order of transfer. The petitioner who is an employee of the 1st respondent has got the liberty to bring to the notice of the Managing Director of the 1st respondent his personal difficulties and seek for a review of Ext. P3 as well as Ext. P4 order. Without taking such steps, the petitioner cannot rush to this Court challenging a relieving order issued by the 2nd respondent-Assistant Manager. 5. Hence, without prejudice to the freedom of the petitioner to approach the 1st respondent and directing the 1st respondent to look into the grievance of the petitioner in case he files a representation, the writ petition is disposed of. K.K. DENESAN JUDGE jan/