IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2008 / 2ND MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 2550 of 2008(C) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ N.VIMALA, II GRADE DRAFTSMAN, P.W.D., N.H.NORTH CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE-1. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.BOSE SRI.VINOD MADHAVAN SMT.NISHA BOSE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (ADMINISTRATION) PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, P.W.D., N.H.NORTH CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE-1. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).2550/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner, who is working as Second Grade Draftsman in Public Works Department, is aggrieved by her deployment to the Local Self Government Department entailing her shifting from Kozhikode to Nadapuram. According to the Petitioner, this further entails a travel of 100 kilometers daily, by bus. Petitioner pleads further personal difficulties also. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that juniors to the Petitioner have been retained in the parent department but the petitioner has been deployed. He further contends that the Government Order regulating the deployment has been violated. Petitioner has approached the Government challenging the deployment under Ext.P9. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. I perused the averments in the writ petition as also Ext.P9. W.P.(C).2550/2008 2 4. In my view, petitioner's contention that the deployment is contrary to the Government order for the reason that the petitioner's juniors have been retained in the parent department and also for the reason that the petitioner's option should have been considered and accepted are matters to be considered by the Government. 5. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P9 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs