IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2010 / 17TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15828 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- G.S.AJAYAKUMAR, VILLAGE OFFICER, VILAPPIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COMMISSIONR OF LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.15828 OF 2010 (C) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ext.P8 order to the extent it transfers the petitioner from Vilappil to Kadakkavur is under challenge. Petitioner is a Village Officer. He was posted at Kadakkavur. He submits that he is suffering from `Paraplegia' due to spinal canal sterosis. It is submitted that he cannot travel, if he is posted at far away place of Kadakkavur. It is also his case that he was posted at Vilappil by Ext.P10 order only on 21.10.2009. 2. Having regard to the above averments in the writ petition, this court directed the respondents to file statement. Accordingly, a statement has been filed, which discloses that after the petitioner was posted at Vilappil, complaints were received about the unauthorized quarrying in the area of his jurisdiction and that the petitioner had not submitted timely report about the same. It is stated that further complaints were reported and that on the directions of the District Collector a site inspection was conducted by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), which revealed that WPC.No. 15828/2010 :2 : unauthorized quarrying was going on within the jurisdiction of the Vilappil Village. It is stated that this prima facie revealed delinquency on the part of the petitioner and it was therefore that he was transfered by the impugned order. It is also stated that even in the transfer by Ext.P8 due consideration has been given to the physical ailments of the petitioner. 3. Although petitioner has filed a reply affidavit disputing the statement filed by the petitioner, the statement filed by the respondents prima facie reveal that it was on finding delinquency on the part of the petitioner on account of his failure in giving timely reports about the illegal quarrying that he was ordered to be shifted out of Vilappil Village. Such an order cannot be said to be arbitrary and on the other hand, is one issued on public interest and due to administrative exigencies. Petitioner also has not established any mala fides against the said order warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Writ Petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No. 15828/2010 :3 :