IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2008 / 28TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24188 of 2008(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.G.THANKAMONY W/O. P.K.GOPALAN, LAST GRADE SERVANT KUNNANTHANNAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MALLAPPALLY BLOCK MALLAPPALLY TALUK,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF GRAMA PANCHAYATH PATHANAMTHITTA 2. THE KUNNANTHANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESEBTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, KUNNANTHANAM, MALLAPPALLY BLOCK, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. THE KUNNANTHANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT KUNNANTHANAM, MALLAPPALLY BLOCK, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. SMT. SHEENA KUMARI.R., SREEJA BHAVAN, PARIYARAM P.O.,MALLAPPALLY PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.24188 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 19th August, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, who is working as Peon in the Kunnathanam Grama Panchayat where she joined duty on 19.1.2007, was transferred by Exhibit P1 and posted as Peon in Performance Audit Unit No.II at Pandalam. The said order of transfer is under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner contends that the order of transfer has been passed on extraneous considerations and mala fides. As directed by this court, the first respondent has filed a statement. The first respondent states that there were complains about the petitioner that the said complaint was enquired into and in the preliminary enquiry conducted against the petitioner, it was found that the allegations levelled against her are true. It is also stated that as a detailed enquiry was found necessary, a decision was taken to transfer the petitioner. It is further stated that pursuant to to Exhibit P1, the W.P ( C) No.24188 of 2008 2 petitioner was relived on 7.8.2008. In the light of the stand taken by the first respondent in Exhibit P1 and in the statement dated 16.8.2008, I find no merit to challenge Exhibit P1. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is due to retire from service on 30.1.2009 and that having regard to the said fact, the petitioner may be granted liberty to move the first respondent or higher officers seeking reconsideration of her transfer. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner is due to retire from service on 30.1.2009, notwithstanding the view taken by me that Exhibit P1 does not merit interference by this Court, it will be open to the petitioner to move the authorities concerned seeking cancellation of Exhibit P1. If such a representation is filed within two weeks from today, the same shall be disposed of within one month thereafter. (P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.24188 of 2008 3 W.P ( C) No.24188 of 2008 4