IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2010 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7819 of 2010(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRASAD R., ABKARI WORKER, F.L.1/2022 SHOP, KOTTARAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.P.SIVARAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING) CORPORATION LTD., P.B.NO.22635, SASTHAKRIPA OFFICE COMPLEX, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 010. 2. THE MANAGER, WARE HOUSE OF K.S.B.C., KOTTARAKKARA. 3. SHOP-IN-CHARGE, FL-1/2022 SHOP, KOTTARAKKARA. STANDING COUNSEL MR. ELVIN PETER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.7819 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an Abkari worker in FL-1 shop conducted by Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Co-operation Ltd. This writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P1 and Ext.P2. As per Ext.P1, the petitioner was called upon to submit explanation as to why disciplinary action shall not be initiated against him for the misconducts alleged against him therein. Therefore, the petitioner was transferred as per Ext.P2, dated 23.2.2010 pending disciplinary action. The petitioner assails the said orders as being illegal, arbitrary and vitiated by malafides. 2. Ext.P1 would reveal that serious allegations of insubordination and dereliction of duty and abusing the superior officer in the presence of customers and other workers have been leveled against the petitioner. Immediately on the same day itself, Ext.P2 order of transfer WPC.7819/10 2 was also issued. Ext.P2 would not reveal an element of desire for imposing any penalty whilst it would reveal that it was with a view to maintain peaceful atmosphere in the shop. Such transfer order cannot be construed as an order which is punitive in nature or infected with malafides. 3. In the above circumstances I find no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, it is made clear that dismissal of this writ petition will not stand in the way of the petitioner to approach the first respondent raising his grievances and requesting for reconsideration of the matter pending disciplinary action. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. SOU.