IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 32517 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, SUPERINTENDENT, KSRTC, THODUPUZHA, RESIDING AT PULARI, ANTHIYOOR PADINJARE, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ANANDARAJAN.N SRI.C.V.MILTON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 23. 2. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (VIGILANCE & ADMINISTRATION), KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 23. 3. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PARASSALA. 4. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THODUPUZHA. BY SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.32517 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner, a superintendent of the K.S.R.T.C., faces certain allegations by a woman officer in the assistant grade that he had indulged in what could be called as harassment of a woman employee in her place of work. The petitioner stands transferred from Parassala to Thodupuzha. He says that there are at least two reports on certain allegations against him. But what he has produced along with the writ petition are not reports of the committee constituted in terms of the directions by the Apex Court in Vishaka's case, which should have a particular quorum, including persons who are not involved in the management or employed in the establishment. On query by this Court as to what happened to that enquiry, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the said committee had concluded that the petitioner should be transferred out of Parassala to avoid such further incidents. Learned counsel for the KSRTC states, WPC.32517/09 2 on instructions, that the initial proposal was to transfer the petitioner from Parassala to Trivandrum and he has been transferred to Thodupuzha because there are no vacancies in the cadre of superintendent in Trivandrum. Taking into consideration the distance from Trivandrum to Thodupuzha and the attendant circumstances, particularly that the management wanted the petitioner to be moved only to Trivandrum from Parassala, it is ordered that the petitioner's request for a posting somewhere near Trivandrum would be considered sympathetically by the management at the earliest. Subject to that, all other reliefs sought for are rejected. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.23/11.