IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 27521 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.S.NAZAR, SECRETARY, UPPUTHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, UPPUTHARA.P.O., IDUKKI-685505. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN SRI.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SRI. TOM K.JOSEPH, SECRETARY, THIDANAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KOTTAYAM DIST. MR.ANTONY MUKKATH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No.27521 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated, this the 28th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner and the 2nd respondent were working as Secretary of the Upputhara Grama Panchayat and Thidanad Grama Panchayat respectively. By Ext.P4 dated 26/09/2009 the petitioner was transferred and posted as Secretary of Peruvanthanam Grama Panchayat, and the 2nd respondent was transferred and posted as Secretary in Upputhara Grama Panchayat, where the petitioner was working. It is this order, which is under challenge. 2. According to the petitioner, though in response to Ext.P2, he has exercised his option, as in the case of the 2nd respondent, transfer was not given. Subsequently, after WP(C) No.17050/2009 was disposed of by Ext.P8 judgment dated 17/08/2009, when the 2nd respondent therein, Shri.K.P.Prabhakaran, who was posted as Secretary at Peruvanthanam Grama Panchayat, withdrew his option, Ext.P4 order was issued transferring him from Upputhara to Peruvanthanam. This according to the partitioner is illegal. It is also his case that if WP(C) No.27521/2009 -2- at all such an arrangement was necessary, instead of transferring him, the 2nd respondent, who too had opted for Peruvanthanam, could have been posted there. 3. At the stage of admission, this Court passed order dated 30/09/2009 staying the operation of Ext.P4, and that order remains in force. Although, the Government have filed a counter affidavit, the 2nd respondent, the person affected by the interim order, has not chosen to enter appearance or file counter affidavit. 4. It is seen from Ext.P5 order dated 01/10/2009 issued by the Additional Director of Panchayats, that in deference to the interim order passed in this writ petition, the petitioner has been retained at Upputhara Grama Panchayat, and the 2nd respondent has been posted at Peruvanthanam. Now that this arrangement has been made by the authorities and as the 2nd respondent has not responded to the notice in this writ petition, this Court will be justified in presuming that the 2nd respondent is satisfied with this arrangement made by Ext.P5 and that he has no grievance in this respect. 5. In that view of the matter, I do not think that the posting WP(C) No.27521/2009 -3- arrangement made by Ext.P5, which is satisfactory to the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, should be disturbed. Therefore, directing that the posting made by Ext.P5 will be regularised, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg