IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 27037 of 2011(D) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- T.PRADEEP KUMAR,AGED 44,S/O.THANKAPPAN NAIR, OVERSEER,OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, THENMALA,K H E P,(KERALA HYDRO ELECTRIC PROJECT) GENERATION CIRCLE,MOOZHIYAR K.S.E.B,PATHANAMTHITTA PIN - 689 662, RESIDING AT SOORYALAYAM,BHAGAWATHI NAGAR, H.NO.169, N C C ROAD,PEROORKKADA P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.THIRUMALA P.K.MANI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, GENERATION CIRCLE, MOOZHIYAR,PATHANAMTHITTA - 689 662. 2. CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), (HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT) VYDUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 026. 3. CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDUTHI BHAVAN,PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 026. R1 TO R3 BY SRI. K.S. ANIL, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.27037/2011-D: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER ORDER DATED 20.07.2011 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 26.07.2011 TO THE ELECTRICAL CIRCLE (URBAN) TRIVANDRUM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Prv. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J --------------------------------------------- W.P.(c)No.27037 of 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is working as an Overseer (Electrical) in the Kerala Hydro Electric Project ('KHEP' for short), Thenmala, has filed this writ petition complaining that though he has been transferred to Electrical Circle, Thiruvananthapuram by Ext.P1 order dated 20.7.2011, the transfer has not been given effect to. According to the petitioner, the delay in giving effect to the order of transfer is causing a lot of hardships and difficulties to him. Therefore, he seeks the issue of appropriate directions for implementation of the transfer granted to him. 2. The Standing Counsel, on instructions, submits that the delay in implementation of the transfer order is due to the difficulty in getting a substitute to take the place of the petitioner. He assures that a substitute would be identified and posted to take the place of the petitioner Wpc No.27037/2011 2 and the petitioner would be relieved within an outer limit of four weeks. 3. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of recording the above undertaking of the counsel for the respondents that the transfer of the petitioner would be given effect to within an outer limit of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. SD/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/ TRUE COPY p.s.to judge