IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2010 / 10TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20521 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR.ANITHA SOMAN, HOMOEO MEDICAL OFFICER, GOVERNMENT HOMOEO HOSPITAL, KJURICHI, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRL.SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HOMEOPATHY THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DR.R.SARALAKUMARI, GOVT.HOMOEO DISPENSARY, VIDURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695 551. BY GOVT. PLEDER SRI. ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.20521 OF 2010 (M) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Homoeo Medical Officer. She was working Chambakkulam in Alappuzha District. 2. During the general transfer 2010-2011, she submitted Ext.P1 representation requesting for a posting at any one of the six places in Thiruvananthapuram District indicated therein. However, she was posted at Kurichi in Kottayam District. That was challenged before this court in WP(c).No.18562/2010. When the matter was heard, the petitioner's complaints were mainly regarding the postings that were made at Nagaroor and Vakkom, the two stations mentoined in Ext.P1 representation. In Ext.P7 judgment this court upheld the postings made but however directed that if she has any grievance, petitioner can move the 2nd respondent for redressal of the grievance. 3. Subsequent to the judgment, Ext.P8 order has been issued by which the petitioner has been transferred from Kurichi to Nandiyodu in Thiruvananthapuram District against a promotion WPC.No.20521 /2010 :2 : vacancy. In this writ petition, challenging Ext.P8 order, what the petitioner mainly contends is that the 3rd respondent who was posted at Vidura by Ext.P5 order has been transferred and posted to Kilimanoor and that the petitioner should have been posted against that vacancy. Admittedly Kilimanoor is not a place opted by the petitioner in Ext.P1 application. The transfers complained by the petitioner were upheld by this court in Ext.P7. Thereafter petitioner was allowed to file a representation requesting for transfer to Thiruvananthapuram. Accordingly she has been posted in Thiruvananthapuram District and so long as the petitioner has not special or superior claim for Kilimanoor I do not think that this court will be justified in interfering in Ext.P8, which has been issued by the 2nd respondent. Writ Petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No.20521 /2010 :3 :