IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2008 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 33299 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. D.DEVARAJAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.DAMODHARAN, TYRE RETREADER REGIONAL WORKSHOP, KSRTC, EDAPPAL. BY ADV. SRI.D.SAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. K.S.R.T.C., REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, (V&A), KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE UNIT OFFICER/WORKS ,MANAGER,REGIONAL WORKSHOP, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, EDAPPAL. ADV. SHRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC, KSRTC FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.33299 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 11th day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that although he was transferred from the Regional Workshop, Edappal to the Central Work Shop, Thiruvananthapuram, as per Ext.P1 order, he is not being relieved from duty to join as per the transfer order. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs: “i) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ direction or order commanding the 3rd respondent to relieve the petitioner from the Regional Workshop, Edappal in compliance of Ext.P1 order so as to enable him to join duty in Central Workshop, Thiruvananthapuram. ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction, commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to issue positive direction to the 3rd respondent to comply with the directions contained in Ext.P1 order and to relieve the petitioner from the Reginal Workshop, Edappal, forthwith. iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction, commanding the respondent No.1 to consider and pass orders in Ext.P2 representation and to direct the 3rd respondent to relieve the petitioner from the Regional Workshop, Edappal in compliance of Ext.P1 order.” 2. The learned standing counsel appearing for the KSRTC submits that the petitioner has been unauthorisedly absent for more than 90 days and as per the orders of the KSRTC, a person w.p.c.33299/08 2 who is unauthorizedly absent from duty for more than 90 days cannot rejoin duty except with the permission of the Chief Officer. It is under the above circumstances that relieving order has not been issued to the petitioner consequent to the transfer. 3. I have considered the rival contentions of the parties. 4. Certainly if the petitioner was unauthorizedly absent, it is open to the KSRTC to take disciplinary proceedings against him. That does not mean that the petitioner can be kept out of service on that ground indefinitely. When the petitioner offers to join duty, he should either be permitted to join duty subject to disciplinary proceedings or subjected to disciplinary proceedings. In this case, admittedly so far the respondents have not taken any action for the alleged unauthorized absence. In the above circumstances, I do not find any reason for the respondents to prevent the petitioner from joining duty as per the transfer order. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent is directed to pass orders permitting the petitioner to join duty subject to the disciplinary proceedings that may be initiated against the petitioner for the alleged misconduct of unauthorized absence and thereupon the 3rd respondent shall relieve the petitioner from duty for taking up w.p.c.33299/08 3 charge in accordance with the transfer orders. The above shall be done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge