IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2009 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34325 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.K.GIREESH KUMAR NAMBOOTHIRI MELSANTHI, KEEZHEDAM, VADAYAMPADI KOTTARAM TEMPLE, THIRUVANKULAM DEVASWOM, THIRUVANKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, O/O.COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, TRIPUNITHURA. 2. THE JUNIOR DEVASWOM OFFICER, THIRUVANKULAM DEVASWOM, THIRUVANKULAM. 3. SHRI. K.N.NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, SANTHI, KAINILA TEMPLE, KARALAM, THRISSUR DIST. SC FOR CDB SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.34325 OF 2009 (I) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P5 to the extent the petitioner, a Melsanthi under the first respondent has been transferred from Vadayampadi to Karikkod. According to the petitioner, he joined the present station on 1.1.2009 pursuant to Ext.P3 and that he has now been disturbed, although, in terms of the guidelines, a Melsanthi is entitled to be in a station for a minimum period of 3 years. It is further stated that for the last 12 years of his service there has been frequent transfers and that the transfer by Ext.P5 is the last in the series. 2. The case was adjourned for the Standing Counsel to obtain instructions from respondents. On instructions, it is stated that one Sri.Manoj who was the Purappada Santhi at Chottanikkara Temple on completion of his tenure, was transferred to Thrippunithura and the Melsanthi therein was transferred to Karalam Kainilam. It is stated that representations were made by both the aforesaid Melsanthies and which resulted in the transfer of Manoj from Thrippunithura to Perunninamkulam WPC.No.34325 /09 :2 : and the Melsanthi posted there was transferred to Trippunithura. The Melsanthi who was posted to Karalam Kainilam to accommodate Sri. Manoj was posted to Vadayampadi, where the petitioner was posted and that in Ext.P5, petitioner was ordered to be transferred and posted at Karikod. It is stated that it was in the aforesaid exigencies of service that the impugned transfer was ordered. 3. An order of transfer can be interfered by this court if it is vitiated by mala fides, if it is issued by an officer who is incompetent to issue the order or if the order is against the conditions of service of the employee concerned. In this case, from the facts disclosed from the submissions made by the Standing Counsel for the respondent I am not persuaded to think that any of the aforesaid vitiating circumstances are attracted. If the exigencies of service necessitate an order of transfer, even the guidelines cannot prevent the authority from issuing the same. If that be so, this court will not be justified in passing any order upsetting Ext.P5. 4. Be that as it may, counsel for the petitioner points out the personal inconveniences and the monetary loss that the petitioner will suffer if the transfer in question is implemented. I notice that the petitioner has already taken up his grievances WPC.No.34325 /09 :3 : before the first respondent by filing Ext.P6 representation and orders have not been passed thereon. Therefore, I direct the first respondent to consider Ext.P6 representation filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 4 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/