IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2008 / 6TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 20374 of 2008(A) PETITIONER: --------------------- C.R.VALSAMMA, VICE PRINCIPAL, GOVT.I.T.I PALLIKKATHODU. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.SUNIL RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR OF TRAINING, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL TRAINING, THYCADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVT.I.T.I, CHENGANNOOR. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVT, I.T.I, PALLIKKATHODU. 4. SMT.P.P.BHAVANI, VICE PRINCIPAL, GOVT.I.T.I, CHENGANNOOR. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NANDAKUMAR R4 BY ADVS. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED & SRI.K.E.HAMZA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.20374 of 2008 A ------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner, who was working in Government Industrial Training Institute, Pallikkathodu, has been transferred under Ext.P2 order to the Industrial Training Institute, Chengannur, which according to her, is 70 kilometers away. The 4th respondent has been transferred and posted in the place of the petitioner at Pallikkathodu. The 4th respondent had requested for a posting in Chengannur and it is apparently to accommodate her that the petitioner has been transferred. 2. The petitioner submits that her husband is partially disabled, since he met with an accident in the year 2007. When options for General Transfer for 2008 were called for, she did not submit any option, since Pallikkathodu is the most convenient station and she herself is due to retire on 30.11.2009. The 4th respondent gave three options; ITI, Pallikkathodu, R.I.Centre, Kottayam and ITI, Ettumanoor. It is to be noted that the 4th respondent is due to retire on 30.09.2009. In W.P.(C).NO.20374/08 :: 2 :: fact, the 4th respondent has a lesser period to retire from service. 3. There may not be anything wrong in the 4th respondent's option being accepted. I cannot find fault with the transfer of the 4th respondent to Pallikkathodu, essentially because the 4th respondent has a lesser period to retire from service, than the petitioner. But, considering the fact that the petitioner has pleaded a personal factor i.e., the illness suffered by her husband and her necessity to remain nearer to Pallikkathodu, I am of the view that the petitioner's claim may be considered by the Government. 4. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms: The petitioner may approach the Director, 1st respondent, with a representation specifically seeking a posting in a place nearby her place of residence within two weeks from today. If this is so filed, the 1st respondent shall pass orders thereon within a period of three weeks thereafter. The order of status quo passed by this court on 8.7.2008 will continue till the Director takes a W.P.(C).NO.20374/08 :: 3 :: decision. I make it clear that the Director is only required to consider the petitioner's claim for a posting near her place of residence and not at Pallikkathodu as such. It is further made clear that irrespective of the decision to be taken by the Director, in the manner aforementioned, the 4th respondent shall be entitled to take charge at Pallikkathodu, immediately on such decision being taken. To avoid further disruption, the 4th respondent may continue at Chengannur, till the Director takes a decision, in the manner aforementioned. Any disruption in the service of the 4th respondent shall be ignored, as she does not seem to be responsible for the same. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge