IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 24365 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BIJIMOLE.E.R., W/O.SHANTHIMON, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KULATHUPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SHRI.S.MOHANAN PILLAI, MEMBER OF THE PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE & FORMER PRESIDENT, KULATHUPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. SRI.S.GANESHAN, CONTRACTOR, VELAYIL VEEDU, AREEPLACHI, ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. KULATHUPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KULATHUPUZHA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI. K.SIJU FOR R5 SRI.A.MUHAMMED RAFFI FOR R5 SRI.PRATHEESH.P FOR R5 SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR FOR R4 SRI.N.AJITH FOR R4 MR.ANTONY MUKKATH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.24365/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF ORDER NO.E3-2100/08/CE/LSGD DATED 11/08/2009. P2 : COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 20/08/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. P3 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 23/10/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.24365 of 2009 (M) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is working as an Assistant Engineer in Kulathupuzha/Alayamon Grama Panchayat. According to the petitioner, she is also holding additional charge of Kadakkal Grama Panchayat, which happens to be her native place. In view of the availability of vacancy at Kadakkal, she desires to get a posting at that place. It is stated that urging her request for transfer to Kadakkal, she has filed Ext.P3 representation before the 2 nd respondent. 2. When this matter came up, the learned counsel for the petitioner, confines his request for a consideration of Ext.P3 representation. Therefore, without prejudice to the contentions raised, and without expressing anything on the merits of the claim raised, I direct the 2 nd respondent to consider Ext.P3 representation filed by the petitioner. 3. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any WP(C) No.24365/2009 -2- rate, within six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg