IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2008 / 28TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 30743 of 2008(I) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.S. RAJAPPAN, SECRETARY, TELECOMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES PROGRESSIVE UNION ERNAKLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.L.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE CHIEF GNERAL MANAGER, BSNL, THIRUVANATHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL GENERAL MANAGER, BSNL, ERNAKLAM. 3. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (ADMIN), O/O THE PRINCIPAL GENERAL MANAGER, BSNL, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.P.C.IYPE,SC,BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LT FOR R1-3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.Ravindran, J. ===================== W.P(C).No.30743 of 2008 ===================== Dated this the 20th day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is Secretary of Telecommunication Employees Progressive Union, Ernakulam District. He challenges Ext.P1 transfer policy framed and issued by the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, hereinafter referred to as the “B.S.N.L. for short. Ext.P1 discloses that it has been issued due to shortage of adequate staff to work in difficult areas like the high ranges. Ext.P1 also discloses that it was issued to ensure availability of personnel to man and run the various installations of the B.S.N.L. in the high ranges and in difficult areas. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that Ext.P1 grants exemption to certain categories of employees and that the exemption thus granted is arbitrary and discriminatory. In my opinion, this Writ Petition is an abuse of the process of the court. The employer is the best judge of the administrative needs and the requirements of the situation. It is not for this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to act as an appellate authority over the administrative policies of the B.S.N.L. and substitute its decision to that of the Department. Ext.P1 discloses that it has been issued with a view to get the services of personnel to work in difficult areas like the high ranges. If the B.S.N.L. thought that to secure the services of personnel to work in difficult areas WP(C) 30743/08 -: 2 :- like the high ranges, they should be offered some benefits, it cannot be said that the said decision is in any way arbitrary or discriminatory or that it offends the fundamental rights of any of the employees of the B.S.N.L. The challenge made by the petitioner to Ext.P1 is without any merit. The Writ Petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed in-limine. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 28/10