IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2008 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16491 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ V.K.RAJASEKHARAN , SCIENTIFIC ASSISTANT GRADE-1,MOBILE SOIL TESTING LABORATORY,KOZHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE SMT.MEERA GOPINATH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).16491/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 12th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner, who is working as Scientific Assistant Grade-I in the Mobile Soil Testing Laboratory in Kottayam, is aggrieved by the refusal on the part of the Government to give him transfer to Thiruvananthapuram District, in spite of Exts.P3 to P5, which specifically provide a preferential right to the Government employees, who are the parents of mentally retarded children. The claim made by the petitioner in this regard is Pending consideration before the Director of Agriculture as Exts.P6 to P8. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.D.Kishore submits that earlier the petitioner had approached the Government in the year 2007, to accommodate him in the existing vacancy. Apparently at that point of time, another person had been accommodated. He submits that there are persons in Thiruvananthapuram District, who have been continuing for more than 15 years and if that W.P.(C).16491/2008 2 be so, it might be necessary for the Government or the Director of Agriculture to intervene and create a vacancy to accommodate the claim of the petitioner. I find substance in this argument. If circulars issued by the Government provide certain preferential right to the claim made by the Government employees, who are the parents of mentally retarded children, the preferential right must be accommodated and accepted as far as possible. After all, the provision which the Government has laid down in that regard is a benevolent provision intended to enable certain Government employees, who are placed in an unfortunate situation of being compelled to look after mentally retarded children. 3. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and take appropriate action on Exts.P6 to P8 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This shall be done with reference to Exts.P3 to P5. If the petitioner's claim is found to be eligible, Director shall W.P.(C).16491/2008 3 not decline the same merely on the ground that there is no available vacancy as on date. The Director shall endeavour to find out whether a vacancy could be created, if necessary by shifting any person who has already completed sufficient tenure within Thiruvananthapuram District. In another words, I impress upon the Director the necessity to bear in mind the seriousness with which the petitioner's claim has to be considered. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs