IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2008 / 5TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 17256 of 2008(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.N.VIJAYAN, WORKING AS ATTENDANT, VETERINARY HOSPITAL, OONUKAL, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU M.JOHN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDARY, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANATHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDARY OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. [CORRECTED AS PER THE ORDER IN I..A 7341/2008] 3. SENIOR SURGEON, VETERINARY HOSPITAL, OONUKAL. 4. NELSON JAIMON, ATTENDANT, VETERINARY HOSPITAL, POTHANIKKADU. 5. MOHNAN KUMAR, ATTENDANT, VETERINARY HOSPITAL, KUTTAMPUZHA. 6. K.R.LEELA, ATTENDANT, VETERINARY HOSPITAL, VARAPETTI. BY ADV. SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH FOR R4 SRI.SHERRY J. THOMAS FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 17256 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 26th June, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner, who is an Attendant in the Animal Husbandry Department, while stationed at Veterinary Hospital, Oonukal, was transferred to Kuttampuzha under Exhibit-P1 order passed by the 2nd respondent. Though the transfer does not reveal any illegality or impropriety or any other factor which will warrant interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, I had requested the Government Pleader to get instructions as to whether the petitioner could be accommodated in a station which causes him least convenience. This was after taking note of the fact that petitioner is a physically handicapped person. 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent and it is pointed out that the transfer was necessitated to accommodate respondents 5 and 6. Both are physically handicapped. Fifth respondent while W.P ( C) No. 17256 of 2008 2 stationed at Kuttampuzha was transferred to Varapetty and the 6th respondent while stationed at Varapetty was accommodated in Pallarimangalam. Since the 5th respondent was transferred out of Kuttampuzha, the petitioner was transferred to Kuttampuzha and apparently, 4th respondent who was at Pothanikkadu was transferred to Oonukal. Fourth respondent has filed an affidavit stating that a transfer to Oonukal would visit him with difficulty as it is far away from his residence. 3. On further instructions, learned Government Pleader submits that there is an open vacancy arising at Pindimana and the 4th respondent could be accommodated therein. This is not objected to by the 4th respondent also. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to pass fresh orders as regards the petitioner, 4th respondent, 5th respondent and 6th respondent. Petitioner may be retained at Oonukal itself and 4th respondent may be accommodated at Pindimana in the vacancy arising on 1.7.2008. Since 4th W.P ( C) No. 17256 of 2008 3 respondent has been kept away from duty for no fault of his, the period when he was away from duty till he has been served with orders posting him in Pindimana may be treated as duty for all purposes. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 17256 of 2008 4 W.P ( C) No. 17256 of 2008 5