IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34212 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. BENNY PAUL,U.D.CLERK,MVIP,DIVISION NO.I, THODUPUZHA (NOW WORKING AS U.D.CLERK, KALOORKADU PANCHAYATH, KALOORKADU. 2. BHANUJAN.V.S,U.D.CLERK, IRRIGATION DIVISION,CHITTOOR(NOW WORKING AS U.D.C. CHITTOR BLOCK PANCHAYATH,PALAKKAD.) 3. V.A.SAJIMON,U.D.CLERK,PROJECT CIRCLE, MUVATTUPUZHA (NOW WORKING AS U.D.CLERK,BLOCK PANCHAYATH, MUVATTUPUZHA). 4. K.CHANDRAN,U.D.CLERK,IRRIGATION SUB DIVISION,NO.III,CHITTOOR (NOW WORKING AS U.D.C, CHITTOOR,THOTTAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY). 5. SUPRIYA,U.D.CLERK,M.I.SUB DIVISION, CHITTOOR (NOW WORKING AS U.D.C.THOTTAMANGALAM CHITTOOR MUNICIPALITY,CHITTOOR. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PANAMPALLI NAGAR) SRI.LUIZ GODWIN D'COUTH SRI.K.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,L.S.G.D, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MS.ANU SIVARAMAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.34212 of 2009 (V) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 30th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners were working as Upper Division Clerks in the Irrigation Department. By Ext.P1 order dated 02/03/2007, they were deployed to Local Self Government Department for a period of two years. On expiry of the period of deputation, by Ext.P2 order dated 21/02/2009, the 1 st respondent ordered repatriation to their parent department. However, they are not relieved on the alleged ground that substitutes are not available. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, substitutes are now available, and that their requests for repatriation made in pursuant to Ext.P2 by Exts.P3 to P7 are still pending consideration of respondents 1 & 4, and that a decision on these requests also has not been taken so far. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition is filed. 3. If as stated by the petitioners, the period of deputation is over, and substitutes are available, prima facie, there is no reason WP(C) No.34212/2009 -2- why their requests for repatriation to their parent department shall not be considered on an expeditious basis. Having regard to the pendency of Exts.P3 to P7 requests before respondents 1 & 4, I direct the aforesaid respondents to consider those requests and pass orders thereon. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg