IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2008 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11347 of 2008(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ S.MOHANA KUMAR, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.SATHYANESAN, RESIDING AT KARAKKATTUVILA VEEDU, PERINGODU, PALLICHAL, NEMOM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (WORKING AS DRIVER IN P.W.D. ELECTRICAL DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (GENERAL), PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ADMINISTRATION), PUBLIC OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ELECTRICAL DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 11347 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 3rd April, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Driver of the Public Works Department. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him and Exhibits P1 and P2 Memos were issued to him in that behalf. Allegations against the petitioner seems to be unauthorised absence from duty. Petitioner has submitted Exhibit P3 reply and the proceedings are yet to be finalised. 2. In the meanwhile, petitioner has been served with Exhibit P4 order relieving him of his duties from 26.3.2008 and asking him to join duty in the new station forthwith. Exhibit P4 has been issued by the Executive Engineer. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.T.Rajasekharan Nair submits that the entire exercise is mala fide. It is resultant upon a malafide exercise by the Executive Engineer that proceedings have been initiated against him. Such proceedings must be completed in the first instance and it is only thereafter that he should be transferred, if at all, he further submits that W.P ( C) No. 11347 of 2008 2 on account of some oblique reasons, order of transfer has not been served on the petitioner . 4. I heard learned Government Pleader also. Learned Government Pleader points out that the order of transfer was issued by the Chief Engineer on 12.3.2008 and it is because the petitioner did not receive the same that relieving order has been sent by registered post with acknowledgment due. Transfer of the petitioner is not a punishment. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of transfer, it is open to him to approach the Government. Submission is recorded. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that proceedings initiated under Exhibits P1 and P2 have not been finalised so far. There is unjustified delay. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms: i) The Chief Engineer - 2nd respondent may finalise the proceedings initiated under Exhibits P1 and P2, at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P ( C) No. 11347 of 2008 3 ii) It is made clear that petitioner shall be given opportunity to attend to the enquiry and appropriate facility shall be given to him considering the fact that he has now been transferred to Kalpetta from Thiruvananthapuram. iii) If the petitioner is exonerated of the charges contained in Exhibits P1 and P2, the transfer now effected may be reviewed and appropriate posting shall be given. iv) Irrespective of the proceedings which are to be taken as above, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of transfer referred to in Exhibit P4, he may approach the Government in that behalf. If it is so done, within a period of two weeks from today, Government shall take an independent decision thereon, within a period of four weeks thereafter. v) Petitioner shall be served with the order of transfer referred to in Exhibit P4 on a request made by him in that behalf. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 11347 of 2008 4 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER W.P ( C) No. 11347 of 2008 5 25th May, 2007 Common issues are raised for consideration in all these writ petitions. Reference is made to the facts in Writ Petition No.4562/2008 for the sake of convenience.