IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2008 / 2ND ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 18479 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ T.S. SAMBOD KUMAR, S/O LATE T.R.SIVAN, AGED 37 YEARS, L.D. CLERK, TRASFERRED FROM TALUK HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL, ALUVA TO DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICE (HEALTH),ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.VIJAYARAJAN SRI.M.SAJJAD RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER (HEALTH), ERNAKULAM 3. SMT. V.MEDINI, L.D. CLERK, GENERAL HOSPITAL, ERNAKULAM (TRASFERRED TO TALUK HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL, ALUVA). BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).18479/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Aggrieved by his transfer from Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Aluva, to the District Medical Office at Eranakulam, effected under Ext.P2, petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the Government. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that apparently petitioner's transfer is only for the purpose of shifting the lien of the third respondent from Eranakulam to Aluva. He further submits that as a matter of fact, third respondent is now working on arrangement at Kollam and if it is a question of availing the services of L.D.Clerk at Eranakulam, the work arrangement of the third respondent ought to have been terminated. But this should not have been done by shifting the petitioner from Aluva to Eranakulam. W.P.(C).18479/2008 2 4. In my view, petitioner's contention in this regard may be considered by the Government. 5. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3, after hearing the petitioner and the third respondent, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the petitioner's contention as mentioned above, is found to be correct, Government shall pass necessary consequential orders. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs