IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 18TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27928 of 2010(S) -------------------------- OA.620/2010 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.RAJAPPAN, HEAD HAVILDAR, CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM II DIVISION, COCHIN-17, HAVING PERMANENT ADDRESS KATTITHARA HOUSE, EZHUPUNNA, ERAMALLOOR PO, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU CHERUKARA SRI.ANZAR BASHEER RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING ,I.S.PRESS ROAD COCHIN-18. 2. MR.K.K.MOHANAN, HEAD HAVILDAR CENTRAL EXCISE, ALAPPUZHA-11 RANGE OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA-11 3. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI, PIN 110 001 4. ADDL.COMMISSIONER (P&V) CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD COCHIN-18 ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL FOR R1,3 & 4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.27928 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 9th day of September, 2010. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Order under challenge is the one issued by the C.A.T. declining to interfere with the transfer. We have heard counsel appearing for the petitioner and Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. After hearing both sides and after going through the order of the Tribunal, we do not find any ground to interfere because petitioner is a resident of Eramalloor and his challenge is against transfer from Alleppey to Ernakulam. By the transfer he is brought to a place nearer to his house. Therefore, we do not find anything unreasonable about the transfer or even violation of the norms as alleged by the petitioner. Consequently W.P.(C) is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge HARUN-UL-RASHID Judge pms