IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 5534 of 2010(N) ------------------------ PETITIONER : ------------------ VINOD T.U., PEON, JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SMT.P.V.ASHA SMT. VINITHA B. RESPONDENT : -------------------- DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K. SANILKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 5534 of 2010(N) -2- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE CERTIFICATES DATED 21.12.96. EXT.P1 A : COPY OF THE CERTIFICATES DATED 8-3-2000 OF EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 18.1.2007 OF THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH PROFORMA. EXT.P2 A : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18-1-07 OF THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE, KATTAKKADA. EXT.P2 B : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22-11-2008 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE. EXT.P3 : COPY OF ORDER NO. ED3/20717/2007/T.EDN DATED 19-8-09 OF RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO. ED3/20717/07 DATED 13-3-2008 OF RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) 23310/2008. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO. EB3/31650/2009 DATED 15-3-2010 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 5534 of 2010-N - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by the rejection of the application for inter departmental transfer as per Ext.P3, stating administrative problems. The petitioner commenced his service as a Peon on 22.11.2006 in the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kattakkada. He was advised by the Public Service Commission from a ranked list for appointment as Last Grade Servants in various Departments. He was regularised as per order dated 19.12.2006. After passing SSLC, the petitioner has acquired the National Trade Certificate in MRTV and Diploma in Electronics and Instrumentation. 2. The petitioner's case is that as a Peon in the Judicial Department, he does not have any promotion prospects. Since the rank list is common to all the departments, the option of the persons included in the rank list are not at all obtained prior to the advice made by the Public Service Commission. Exts.P2, P2A and P2B are the copies of applications and covering letter. 3. The petitioner points out that the reasons stated in Ext.P3 are not wpc 5534/2010 2 correct. Inter departmental transfer of last grade servants is permissible under Rule 17(d) of the Special Rules for Kerala Last Grade Service. He is willing to be transferred as a Watchman also. It is further pointed out that there are seven vacancies in the Technical Education Department. 4. The petitioner is also relying upon Ext.P5 judgment of this Court in 23310/2008 wherein this Court, after examining various aspects, directed the application to be considered on merits. Two other judgments of this Court in W.P.(C) Nos.36343/2008 and 551/2009 were also relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner at the time of arguments. 5. In the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent the contention raised is that the motivation for inter departmental transfer is further promotions and since promotions are being obtained by such transferees, vacancies arise in the cadre of Class IV employees in the department. It is also pointed out that the posts of Watcher and Peon are interchangeable. Further, it is pointed out that such vacancies are being reported to the Public Service Commission directly by the heads of institutions and there is a valid P.S.C. rank list of LGS at present. Lastly, it is pointed out that Department has recommended the Government to amend the special rules relating to the service of last grade servants for improving the quality of administration, as it envisages much difficulty in arranging the service of wpc 5534/2010 3 last grade servants. 6. According to the me, none of the above reasons are sufficient to deny the claim for inter departmental transfer. It is available under Rule 17 (d) of the Special Rules. In Ext.P5 judgment, this Court in similar circumstances, held as follows: “In my considered opinion there is no merit in the stand taken by the respondents. Appointment of last grade servants in various departments of the Government is made from a common ranked list. Therefore, if the petitioner leaves the General Education Department and joins the Technical Education Department no loss will be caused to direct recruits or those awaiting appointment for the reason that instead of a vacancy in the Technical Education Department a vacancy will arise in the General Education Department. No other reason has been stated, either in Ext.P4 or in the statement, to deny the request made by the petitioner for inter departmental transfer.” The above judgment was relied upon by this Court in the judgment in W.P. (C) No.36343/2008, wherein also the petitioner was a Peon in Judicial Department who sought for a transfer to the Technical Education Department. This Court, after quashing the impugned orders therein, issued a direction to consider the application for transfer in any existing vacancy. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner wpc 5534/2010 4 therein has already obtained the transfer. The reasoning therein will apply squarely to the facts of this case. Similar views have been taken in W.P.(C) Nos.36343/2008 and 551/2009. 7. Along with the reply affidavit, the petitioner has produced Ext.P6, a copy of the order whereby four last grade servants from Thiruvananthapuram District in the Directorate of Technical Education, have been appointed to the post of Tradesman. It is therefore pointed out that sufficient vacancies are existing. The reason stated in Ext.P3 is not cogent and convincing. 8. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P3 is quashed. There will be a direction to the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner for transfer on merits and his claim will be considered in any one of the existing vacancies and appropriate orders will be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/