IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2008 / 3RD BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25420 of 2008(A) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- GEORGE P.ABRAHAM,EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, TOWN EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE,THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.N.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.B.V.BALAKRISHNAN SRI.B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVT LABOUR & REHABILITATION (G) DEPARTMENT, GOVT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. M.A.KABEER,EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, TOWN EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE,KANJIRAPPALLY. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.N.Ravindran, J. ===================== W.P(C).No.25420 of 2008 ===================== Dated this the 25th day of August, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner who is working as Employment Officer in Town Employment Exchange, Thodupuzha challenges his transfer by Ext.P1 order dated 18.8.2008 to the District Employment Exchange, Idukki at Kattappana. The third respondent is the substitute appointed in the petitioner's place at Thodupuzha on transfer from Town Employment Exchange, Kanjirappally. The petitioner challenges his transfer to Idukki and the posting of the third respondent at Thodupuzha. The petitioner, relying on the guidelines governing transfer, contends that as his wife is a physically handicapped person and a government servant, he cannot be shifted from Thodupuzha. The Apex Court has in State of U.P. and others v. Gobardhan Lal - (2004) 11 S.C.C. 402 held that guidelines governing transfer do not confer any enforceable right on the employee. The Apex Court has further held that an order of transfer cannot be lightly interfered with unless it is shown to be one passed by an incompetent authority or is passed in violation of any statutory rule or is proved to be one rested on extraneous considerations and vitiated by malafides. In the instant case, the petitioner has not pleaded or proved that the order of transfer is issued by an incompetent authority or WP(C) 25420/08 -: 2 :- is one vitiated by malafides. As regards the challenge based on the guidelines, in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court, the petitioner cannot compel the transferring authority to strictly adhere to the norms governing transfer. I therefore hold that there is no merit in this Writ Petition. The Writ Petition accordingly fails and it is dismissed. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 26/8