IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2009 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 15646 of 2009(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- PREETHY CHERIYAN, L.D.TYPIST, SPECIAL OFFICE OF THE GEOLOGIST, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADVS.MR.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA MR.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPT. OF INDUSTRIES, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MINING & GEOLOGY, DIRECTORATE OF MINING & GEOLOGY, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. A.R.JOCELIN, U.D.TYPIST, OFFICE OF THE GEOLOGIST, DEPT. OF MINING & GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 15646 of 2009-A =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 12th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Sri. Babu Joseph Kuruvathazha, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Anu Sivaraman, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to or hear the third respondent. 2. The petitioner who is a person with disability has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P10 order dated 02-06-2009 passed by the second respondent whereby until further orders Ext.P9 order transferring the petitioner from Cherthala to Ernakulam on her request, has been kept in abeyance. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 submits, on instructions, that Ext.P9 order was kept in abeyance on a representation submitted by the third respondent complaining about the petitioner’s transfer from Cherthala to Ernakulam and the third respondent’s transfer from Ernakulam to Cherthala. The learned Government Pleader submits that the said representation is being examined and that Ext.P10 W.P.(C) No. 15646/09 2 order was passed only as an interim measure. The learned Government Pleader further submits that the Director of Mining and Geology will take a decision on the representation submitted by the third respondent after hearing the petitioner also. 4. In my opinion as Ext.P10 is only an interim order passed on a representation submitted by the third respondent, the petitioner cannot be said to be a really aggrieved by the same. The petitioner can be said to be aggrieved only if Ext.P9 is cancelled. Since the Director of Mining and Geology is examining the question whether Ext.P9 should be cancelled or not, the writ petition is in my opinion premature. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation submitted by the third respondent and pass final orders thereon on or before 30-6-2009 after notice to the petitioner and third respondent. The second respondent shall while passing orders have due regard to the stipulations contained in the Government orders governing transfer and posting of Government employees and also the Government orders extending concessions to persons with disability. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. mn.