IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2010 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10092 of 2010(J) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SUDHARMA T., U.D.CLERK, KRP SUB DIVISION NO.3, SULTHAN BATHERY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, RESIDING AT SISIRAM, PALLARPADI P.O., SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD. BY ADVS.MR.C.S.MANU MR.S.K.PREMRAJ MR.ABHILASH AKBAR MR.T.B.SIVAPRASAD SMT.SUMEY CHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHIEF ENGINEER(IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT (ERA DEPARTMENT), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. MONSON PAULOSE, IRRIGATION DIVISION, CHITTOOR. 5. P.P.REKHA, PROJECT CIRCLE, KANNUR. W.P.(C) NO.10092/2010 6. K.C.ANAND, M.I. SUB DIVISION, ATTINGAL. 7. S.USHA, KIPC (RB) DIVN. NO.2, KOTTARAKKARA. 8. E.SUBRAMANIAN, M.I. DIVISION, MALAPPURAM. 9. D.RAJU, KIP SUB DIVISION,KAKKODI, KOZHIKODE. 10. SHEEMA B.S., O/O.CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION & ADMINISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 11. SHYAMALA K., M.I. SUB DIVISION, KANJANHAD. 12. RAFEEK P.C., P.P.DIVISION NO.II, KANNUR. 13. V.R.SINDHU, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, THALASSERY. 14. M.N.SURESH, DVIP DIVISION NO.4, PIRAVOM. 15. JOHNY KURIAN,M.I. SUB DIVISION, MULAMTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 10092 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T In this Writ Petition, the petitioner who is working as an Upper Division Clerk in Irrigation Department, challenges Ext.P4 order whereby she was transferred on redeployment to the Local Self Government Department. The specific contention of the petitioner is that the persons whose name figures at Sl. No. 4 to 15 are juniors to her. The essential contention of the petitioner is that while issuing Ext.P4 orders, respondents have ignored Exts.P5 and P6. Exts.P5 and P6 are Government orders prescribing certain guidelines in the matter, it is submitted. There is no justification for deviating from the guidelines set forth, it is further submitted. The petitioner has approached the respondents raising grievances against Ext.P4 as per Ext.P7 and P8. 2. The learned Government Pleader submits that Exts P5 and P6 are not orders pertaining to the subject of deployment or redeployment whilst it pertains to the subject of transfer. WPC.10092 of 2010 : 2 : However, without going into the merits of the rival contentions, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P8 representation expeditiously. Till such a consideration the petitioner shall be permitted to continue in the said post. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma