IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29744 of 2011(P) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- ROSAMMA THOMAS, AGED 51, W/O.KURUVILA JOSEPH, HEAD CLERK, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, VAIKOM, RESIDING AT MANALEZHATH HOUSE, NORTH GATE, VAIKOM P.O., VAIKOM. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.IBRAHIM SMT.K.P.AMBIKA SMT.V.BEENA 2ND RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRTARY TO GOVERNMENT, MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, KERALA, TRIVANDRUM-695 034. 3. P.N.AMBIKADEVI, JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM-682 030. 4. K.N.BALACHANDRAN, JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM-682 0030. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. LIJU JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 29744/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06/08/2011. P2: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12/10/2011. P3: COPY OF THE TRANSFER GUIDELINE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 11/05/2011. P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18/10/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 29744 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th November, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioner, a senior head clerk in the service of the Motor Vehicles Department has filed this writ petition challenging her posting to Thrissur alleging that her request for a posting to Ernakulam has not been considered by the authority. The petitioner was working at Vaikom. As per Ext.P2 order, she has been promoted as a Junior Superintendent and has been posted to Thrissur. According to the counsel for the petitioner, Ext.P2 is violative of the guidelines for transfer, produced as Ext.P3 in the writ petition. Therefore, the counsel seeks the issue of appropriate orders setting aside Ext.P2. 2. I have heard the learned Govt. Pleader also. 3. A reading of Ext.P2 shows that the same is a promotion order and not an order of transfer. An employee who is promoted is liable to be posted in the higher post as directed by the superior authority. The guidelines Ext.P3 are not applicable to postings consequent to the grant of promotion. Therefore, the ground of attack on the basis of Ext.P3 guidelines has to fail. The counsel for WPC 29744/2011 2 the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has already submitted Ext.P4 representation to the first respondent, which is pending consideration of the said authority. Therefore, a direction to consider and dispose of the same may be issued, it is submitted. 4. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the grievances of the petitioner set out in Ext.P4 representation in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj P.S.to Judge WPC 29744/2011 3