IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2011 / 28TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 22674 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.MANIKANDAN,S/O.ARUMUGHAN,DEVI NIVAS, 7/777, AYYAPURAM,KALPATHY POST, PALAKKAD, WORKING AS PEON, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ROADS DIVISION,PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.H.BADARUDDIN SMT.B.SHAMEERA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER,PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,ADMINISTRATION,TRIVANDRUM 695 033. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ROADS DIVISION,PALAKKAD 678 001. 3. K.GOVINDANKUTTY,PEON, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION,PALAKKAD 678 001. BY GP A J VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX (WP(C) 22674/2011) PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER ORDER BEARING NO.ED3/2390/ 2010 DATED 5.4.2010. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT TEXT OF THE GUIDELINES FOR TRANSFER OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PRESENT TRANSFER ORDER DT. 18.8.2011 lgk //TRUE COPY// C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 22674 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner who is presently working as a Peon in the roads Division, Palakkad under the Public Works Department filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P3. He came to the present station pursuant to Ext.P1 order of transfer and he joined the said station on 8.4.2010. As per the impugned order viz., Ext.P3 he has been transferred from Roads Division Palakkad to Building Division, Palakkad. Thus, obviously, the petitioner is transferred as per Ext.P3 only from one division to another division that too within Palakkad District itself. The only contention of the petitioner is that the said order of transfer was effected before completion of the normal tenure of three years and therefore, it violates Clause 2(b) of Ext.P2 G.O dated 22.5.1989. Thus, in essence, the contention of the petitioner is that Ext.P1 is bad in law on account of violation of norms and therefore, liable to be interfered with, which provides three years period as the normal period of stay. This Court in umpteen number of WPC.No.22674/2011 : 2 : decisions held that the transfer norms are not enforceable and they do not give any right to Government Servants in the matter of transfer. [See the decisions in Babu v. State of Kerala (1988(2) KLT 258) and State of Kerala v. Rajan (1989(2) KLT 666)]. In the said circumstances, I am of the view that there is no merit in this writ petition and accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge