IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2010 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 15974 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- K.M.BABU, S/O.N.K.MADHAVAN, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT, (PRESENTLY WORKING AS LAY SECRETARY AND TREASURER TALUK HEADQUARTERS HOSPITAL, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 15974 OF 2010 (V) ===================== Dated this the 25th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Senior Superintendent presently posted in Tirurangadi in Malappuram District. On the ground that his wife is posted at Kottayam and his father is a sickly person, he has been representing for transfer to Kottayam District. In Ext.P3 judgment, this Court directed consideration of the request, and accordingly by Ext.P5, he was informed by the 1st respondent that his claim will be considered in accordance with the Rules. However, his complaint is that in Ext.P9 general transfer order, he was not considered, and that again in Ext.P12, when transfers and postings were effected, a junior person was promoted and posted to Changanasserry, one of the places claimed by the petitioner. He contends that the posting by Ext.P12 is against Ext.P13 guidelines. 2. Irrespective of the contentions raised, petitioner now submits that he has highlighted all his grievances in Ext.P10 representation addressed to the 2nd respondent with copy to the 1st respondent. Having regard to the nature of the grievance and WPC No. 15974/10 :2 : the facts as highlighted, it is only appropriate that the 1st respondent should consider Ext.P10 representation. This the 1st respondent shall do, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp