IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 21403 of 2008(W) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- MS. LEKHA SUKUMARAN, STAFF NURSE, DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------- --------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE D.M.O, KOLLAM. 3. S. SHYAMALA, STAFF NURSE, GR.II, DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.21403/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE RELEANT PORTION OF THE SENIORITY LIST OF STAFF NURSE FROM 77.90 TO 31.12.02. P2:- COPY OF THE OBJECTION PREFERRED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DT. 4.1.08 AND SENT THROUGH PROPER CHANNEL. P3:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION MADE UNDER SEC. 6 OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT TO THE INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE D.H.S. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ES3-73956/06/DHS DT. 25.10.07. P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A5/21407/09/DMOH. K DT. 21.1.09 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.21403/2008-W ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 26th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the irregularities in the assignment of seniority in Ext.P1 seniority list dated 25/10/2007. The facts as averred in the writ petition are the following:- The petitioner is now working as Staff Nurse in the District Hospital, Kollam. She was selected and advised for appointment by the P.S.C as per advice memo dated 05/11/1990. Pursuant to her appointment, she joined duty as Staff Nurse on 19/11/1990 in the District Hospital, Kottayam. After working there for five years, she applied for an inter district transfer to Kollam District and as per order No.A5/7800/96/DMOH, Kollam, she was transferred to Kollam District and thereafter, she joined duty on 19/06/1996. 2. The third respondent after being selected by the P.S.C was appointed on November 1992 in Kottayam District. In 1998 she was transferred to Kollam District consequent on her application for inter district transfer to Kollam District. 3. In the light of the fact that she is junior to the petitioner and as she had also been transferred by inter district transfer to Kollam, she cannot be treated as senior to the petitioner. But in Ext.P1 seniority list, she is W.P.(C) No.21403/2008 -:2:- assigned rank No.321 whereas the petitioner is assigned rank No.985. The column No.6 of Ext.P1 shows that the third respondent was appointed on 19/11/1992 in Kottayam District. Against the remarks column, the details of inter district transfer in respect of the third respondent have not been shown. But against the remarks column in respect of the petitioner it is recorded that she obtained the inter district transfer on 15/06/1996. 4. Seeking for appropriate revision of the seniority list, the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 representation before the Director of Health Services. This was submitted through the second respondent. Inspite of the reminder being sent as Ext.P3, no action was taken. But in the meanwhile the third respondent has been benefited by a promotion as Head Nurse as per proceedings of the District Medical Officer for Health, Kollam, dated 21/01/2009. 5. The third respondent being an inter district transferee it is obvious that she was not entitled for seniority above the petitioner. As per the pleadings, she was transferred to Kollam District in the year 1998, whereas the petitioner was transferred on 15/06/1996. Therefore, the third respondent cannot be granted any seniority over the petitioner. She is junior to her going by the date of appointment in Kottayam District. 6. Inspite of service of notice, the third respondent has not caused to file a counter affidavit in the matter. The official respondents have not W.P.(C) No.21403/2008 -:3:- also disputed the claims raised by the petitioner. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioner made as per Exts.P2 and P3 to revise the seniority list published as per Ext.P1 (proceedings of which has been produced as Ext.P4). Appropriate orders shall be passed to redress the grievance of the petitioner by assigning her due seniority within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment with notice to the third respondent. Depending upon the assignment of revised seniority, the petitioner will be entitled for consequential promotion and other service benefits. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms