IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 12058 of 2009(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SUNIL.T, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, (CIVIL), LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, KEEZHARIYUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AND PWD ADMINISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. ARAVINDKUMAR BABU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.12058/2009-B: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE G.O.NO.186/2000/LSGD DTD. 04/07/2000. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. E3/186/05/CE/LSGD (2) DTD. 26/04/2007 AND RELEVANT PAGES. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE KERALA LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING SUBORDINATE SERVICE RULES 2007. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE G.O.(RT).NO.3426/07 LSGD DTD. 13/12/2007. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE OPTION DTD. 26/12/07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. NIL. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R.2. DTD. 29/01/09. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE LIST OF PERSONS JUNIOR TO ME AND ARE STILL CONTINUING IN THE PARENT DEPARTMENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No.12058 of 2009 (B) -------------------------- Dated, this the 10th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner joined the Public Works Department as an Assistant Engineer on 20/09/2006. Based on Ext.P1 Government Order dated 04/07/2000, the petitioner was deployed to the Local Self Government Department and he joined that Department on 26/06/2007. The deployment was for a period of three years. Before the expiry of the 3 years tenure, the petitioner represented for repatriation to the parent department. In the judgment in WP(C) No.1561/2008, this Court directed that his representation should be considered by the Chief Engineer. Accordingly, the Chief Engineer considered the representation and passed Ext.P7 order. In Ext.P7, the Chief Engineer took the view that since the term of deployment is not over, and as repatriation of Officers like the petitioner will severely affect proper and timely implementation of the works of the Local Self Government Department, the request of the petitioner for repatriation to the parent department cannot be granted. It is Ext.P7 order, which is under challenge in this writ WP(C) No.12058/2009 -2- petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his juniors in the PWD are retained without repatriation, and that he and others were deployed to Local Self Government Department. 3. Irrespective of the contentions, as already seen, the period of deployment is for three years. Therefore, the three year period will expire only in June, 2010. At that stage, it will be open to the petitioner to seek his repatriation to the parent department, in which event, necessarily, the Chief Engineer will have to consider the claim on merits. While doing so, necessarily, the case of the petitioner that his juniors are retained in the parent department without being deployed, will also arise for consideration. Therefore, leaving it open the claim of the petitioner for repatriation on completion of the 3 year tenure in the LSGD, in which event, the claim will be considered by the 2nd respondent, I dispose of this writ petition. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg