IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2007 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1928 WA.No. 679 of 2007() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.27406/2006 .................... APPELLANT: 3RD RESPONDENT IN WRIT PETITION ------------------------------------------ SMT.LATHIKA, NURSE GR.II, GOVERNMENT HOMOEO HOSPITAL, NORTH PARAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.R.REENA RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER & RESPONDENT 1 & 2 ------------------------------------------ 1. A.A.SANTHAMMA, NURSE SENIOR GRADE, GOVERNMENT HOMOEO HOSPITAL, CHERTHALA. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMOEPATHY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF HOMOEOPATHY, HOMOEOPATHIC DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R2 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI BENNY GERVACIS R1 BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2007,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & ANTONY DOMINIC,JJ. ----------------------------------------------- W.A.NO. 679 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of March, 2007 JUDGMENT Raman,J. Third respondent in W.P.(C).No.27406/2006 is the appellant herein. Writ Petition was filed by one Santhamma, the lst respondent in this appeal, challenging Ext.P2 order transferring her from North Parur in Ernakulam District to Cherthala in Alappuzha District. That transfer was made on the basis of a request made by the appellant herein. It was the contention that the transfer was against the principles laid down in the matter of inter-district transfers. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the matter, found that Ext.P2, as far as the writ petitioner and the 3rd respondent is concerned, is liable to be set aside and the 2nd respondent was directed to pass orders posting the appellant herein and the petitioner (1st respondent) in the districts from where they were transferred, as early as possible. 2. The 3rd respondent has filed this appeal on a limited ground that she may be allowed to continue in the present station till May, 2007. 3. Heard both sides. -2- W.A.NO.679/2007 4. In view of the fact that the appellant (3rd respondent) is already working in the present station and she has got school going children, in order to avert hardship, the appellant will be allowed to continue in the present station till 30/4/2007 and in all other respects the judgment under appeal stands confirmed. Appeal is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, Judge. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge. kcv.