IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 7484 of 2010(I) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ELDHO M.KURIAKOSE, UPPER DIVISION CLERK, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, M.V.I.P.DIVISION NO.IV, PIRAVOM, PIRAVOM.P.O, PIN-686 664. BY ADVS. SRI.M.PAUL VARGHESE SRI.M.K.GINASH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, PROJECT CIRCLE, MUVATTUPUZHA, MUVATTUPUZHA.P.O. 4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, M.V.I.P.DIVISION NO.IV, PIRAVOM, PIRAVOM.P.O, 5. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 7484 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as an Upper Division Clerk under the fourth respondent in the Irrigation Department. This Writ Petition has been filed challenging Ext.P6 order. As per Ext.P6 order, the petitioner is deployed to the Local Self Government Department. Earlier, the petitioner was ordered to be deployed as per Ext.P3 order dated 2.3.2007. However, the said order could not be served on the petitioner and he could not be relieved on account of a mistake that had crept in the said order with respect to the address of the petitioner. Be that as it may, pursuant to Ext.P3 order, the petitioner was not relieved and at the same time, persons who were ordered to be deployed along with the petitioner were actually deployed. Pursuant to that, on realising the mistake, Ext.P6 order has been issued. Citing personal reasons, the petitioner contends that at present he is not in a position to keep aloof from the family and the office to which he is posted on deployment is in a far off place that too, in a remote area. That apart, he is having a grievance that he has been singled out inasmuch as most of his juniors allowed to continue in the Irrigation Department itself. W.P.(C) NO.7484/2010 2 2. Admittedly, as per Ext.P3 order, the petitioner was ordered to be deployed and it could not be implemented solely on account of the mistake that had crept in the said order itself as regards the address of the petitioner. Virtually, Ext.P6 is an order passed after taking into account the aforesaid aspects. Indisputably, the persons ordered to be deployed along with the petitioner as per Ext.P3 have either completed their tenure or are continuing in the Local Self Government Department. 3. In this Writ Petition, a statement has been filed by the second respondent. The circumstances under which Ext.P6 has been issued is explained in the statement. It is also stated therein that the persons who were ordered to be deployed along with the petitioner as per Ext.P3 are actually deployed and are still continuing in the Local Self Government Department and, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim that he should be permitted to continue in the Irrigation Department despite Exts.P3 and P6. No arbitrariness or illegality can be attributed in the action on the part of the respondents. In view of the facts obtained in this case, I cannot hold that Ext.P6 is illegal or irrational, warranting interference by this Court. W.P.(C) NO.7484/2010 3 The Writ Petition is devoid of any merits and it is accordingly dismissed. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.7484/2010 4 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C). NO.7484 /2010 JUDGMENT 24th March, 2010