IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD SEPTEMBER 2008 / 12TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26577 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ K.MINI, LECTURER, CIVIL ENGINEERING, GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC KALAMASSERY, NOW POSTED AS IST GRADE INSTRUCTOR, RIT KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.C.ELDHO RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PADMAVILASAM, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SR.JOINT DIRECTOR (PS), OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PADMAVILASAM, TRIVANDRUM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. SHRI A.J. VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. ............................................................ W.P.(C) No. 26577 OF 2008 ............................................................ Dated this the 3rd September , 2008 J U D G M E N T The averments made in the Writ Petition would indicate the following facts.: The petitioner is a graduate Engineer and was working as Lecturer in the Department of Technical Education. She is having 15 years of teaching experience, out of which for nine years she has been working as Lecturer in Civil Engineering . She is one among the seniormost Lecturers qualified to be considered for promotion to the post of Head of the Department. While the petitioner was working as Lecturer at Sreerama Polytechnic, Valappad, she was transferred to the Government Polytechnic, Kalamassery and posted temporarily against the post of the Head of the Department in Civil Engineering by order dated 02.11.2007. Exhibit P1 is the order dated 02.11.2007. Exhibit P1 would indicate that the post of Head of the Department in Civil Engineering was lying vacant. The petitioner joined at the Government Polytechnic, Kalamassery. As per Ext. P2 order dated 08.07.2008, the petitioner was transferred to the Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology, Kottayam as First Grade Instructor in Civil Engineering. The petitioner submits that Ext. P2 order is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the rules and guidelines. It is pointed out that W.P.(C) No. 26577 OF 2008 2 within a period of one year she was transferred to two places in quick succession. It is also pointed out that she is now transferred to the post of First Grade Instructor, which is a feeder category for the post of Lecturer. Ext. P2 is challenged on that ground as well. 2. Even before complying with Ext. P2 order and joining at the Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology, Kottayam, the petitioner submitted Ext. P3 representation dated 14.07.2008 to the second respondent pointing out her grievances. It is stated that the petitioner joined at the Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology, Kottayam on 13.08.2008 and that on the same date she submitted Ext. P4 representation to the second respondent . It is pointed out that the post of Head of Section in Civil Engineering at the Government Polytechnic, Kalamassery was lying vacant on the date on which the petitioner joined duty on 13.08.2008 at the Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology, Kottayam. Some other grounds are also raised in the Writ Petition, which, according to the petitioner would be sufficient to retain her at the Government Polytechnic, Kalamassery. Exhibits P3 and P4 representations are not yet disposed of. 3. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following: “a) Call for the records leading to Exhibit P2 order and quash that part of Exhibit P2 transferring the petitioner to Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology, Kottayam as 1st grade Instructor by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction. b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order or W.P.(C) No. 26577 OF 2008 3 direction compelling the respondents to re-transfer and re- post the petitioner in Government Poly Technic, Kalamassery where she is posted as Exhibit P1 order. c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction compelling the 2nd respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P3 and P4 representations with reference to Exhibit P6 and P7 Government orders and the condition mentioned in Exhibit P1 within a time limit stipulated by this Hon'ble Court. d) Issue such other writ order or direction that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit while considering the peculiar circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the present, the petitioner would be satisfied if Exhibits P3 and P4 representations are directed to be disposed of by the second respondent at the earliest, leaving open the right of the petitioner to challenge Ext. P2 at the appropriate stage. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is just and reasonable. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: i) The second respondent shall consider and dispose of Exhibits P3 and P4 representations, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. ii) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified W.P.(C) No. 26577 OF 2008 4 copy of the judgment before the second respondent. iii) The petitioner waives the right to be heard before the second respondent in order to enable the second respondent to dispose of Exhibits P3 and P4 representations at the earliest. iv) It is made clear that the second respondent need not issue notice to the petitioner before disposing of Exhibits P3 and P4 representations. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. lk