IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 WA.No. 971 of 2010 ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.14800/2010 Dated 18/05/2010 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ---------------------------- JAGATHY, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.KUNJAN PILLA, WORKING AS LAST GRADE SERVANT, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTNAT CONTROLLER LEGAL METROLOGY, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.S.PRAVEEN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. CONTROLLER, LEGAL METROLOGY DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER, LEGAL METROLOGY, IDUKKI DISTRICT, THODUPUZHA. 3. J.UNNIPILLA, LAST GRADE SERVANT, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR, LEGAL METROLOGY, KATTAPPANA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, CJ. & P.N.Ravindran, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 971 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Ravindran, J. The appellant is the petitioner in WP(C) No.14800 of 2010. In that writ petition he challenged Ext.P1 order passed by the Controller of Legal Metrology transferring him from Thodupuhzha to Kattappana. By judgment delivered on 18.05.2010, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that no grounds have been made out to interfere with the transfer order. The learned single Judge however observed that if the petitioner has any grievance, it will be open to him to move the departmental authorities and seek redressal of his grievance. 2. The Apex Court has in State of U.P. v. Gobardhan Lal[(2004) 11 SCC 402] held that an order of transfer can be interfered with only if it is one issued in violation of any statutory rule or by an incompetent authority or is shown to be vitiated by mala fides. In the instant case the petitioner has no case that the order of transfer is one issued in violation of any statutory rule or by any incompetent authority. He has also no case that WA No. 971 of 2010 -:2:- it is vitiated by mala fides. The Apex Court has in the aforesaid decision also held that this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot sit in appeal over the decision of the transferring authority and substitute its decision in the place of the decision of the transferring authority. In the light of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court it has to be necessarily held that in the absence of any challenge to the order of transfer either on the ground that it is vitiated by mala fides or that it is one issued by an incompetent authority or that it is one issued in violation of any statutory rule, the decision of the learned single Judge does not merit interference. We accordingly hold that there is no merit in the Writ Appeal. The Writ Appeal fails and is dismissed. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ttb