IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2008 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15940 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ THRESSIAMMA C.K, AGED 44 YEARS, ANGANVADI WORKER, NO.10 ANGANVADI, ADITHYAPURAM KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, RESIDING AT THACHERIL HOUSE, IRAVIMANGALAM PO, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE J.MATHAIKAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, THE DISTRICT OFFICE, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT OFFICE, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. P D ANITHAKUMARI, TEMPORARY ANGANVADI WORKER, NO.10 ANGANVADI, K.S.PURAM, KOTTAYAM DIST. 4. KADUTHURUTHY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).15940/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 30th day of May, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner, who is an Anganvadi worker is aggrieved by Ext.P2 order by which she has been transferred from Anganvady Centre No.10 to Anganvadi Centre No.163. A reading of Ext.P2 will show that the transfer order came to be passed on account of a constant conflict between Anganvadi worker and the Anganvadi helper in Centre No.10. Apparently, the Project Officer thought it fit to transfer both the persons. There is no error in the stand taken by the Officer that both the Anganvadi worker and Anganvadi helper are liable for transfer. But I take note of the fact that, according to the petitioner, transfer now requires a travel of more than 20 kms., every day. If the purpose was to discipline the workers, it possibly would have been served by transferring the petitioner to a nearby centre. This is an aspect which would merit consideration by the District Officer before whom Ext.P3 is pending. W.P.(C).15940/2008 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been relieved from Anganvadi Centre No.10 pursuant to Ext.P2 order dated 24.5.2008. Having heard learned counsel on both sides, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P3 and pass suitable orders thereon, taking note of the observations made and the specific facts pleaded by the petitioner in Ext.P3. This shall be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall be permitted to continue in Anganvadi Centre No.10 as Anganvadi Worker, pending decision on Ext.P3. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs