IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2010 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35833 of 2010(D) PETITIONER: --------------- ANIL.P.M,PRINCIPAL,G.H.S.S.,MANKADA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.PADMANABHAN NAIR.K.V,NOW RESIDING AT NOOPURAM(H), P.O. MUNDUPARAMBA,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-676509, ERNAD TALUK,MUNDUPARAMBA AMSOM,MALAPPURAM DESOM. BY ADV. SRI.V.C.JAMES SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-675001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-675011. 3. MUHAMMED BASHEERUDHEEN ANANGADAN, PRINCIPAL GOVT.H.S.S,VARIAYAMBALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-676 509. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C). NO. 35833 OF 2010 D ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as Principal, Government Higher Secondary School, Mankada, Malappuram District. He submitted Ext.P5 application for transfer. In the application, he had shown names of four schools in the order of preference, the first among them being Government Higher Secondary School, Irumbuzhi, Malappuram District. The grievance of the petitioner is that his application for transfer was not considered and the third respondent was transferred to Government Higher Secondary School, Irumbuzhi, as per Ext.P6 order of transfer dated 26.11.2010. The petitioner contends that he was appointed as the Principal of Government Higher Secondary School as per ext.P1 Government Order dated 1.8.2009, whereas the third respondent was appointed as Principal only as per Ext.P2 Government Order dated 27.3.2010. The petitioner also contends that he being senior to the third respondent, he should have been granted preference, going by G.O. (P) No.115/09/Gl.Edn. dated 27.5.2009 (Ext.P3). As per Ext.P3 W.P.(C) NO.35833 OF 2010 :: 2 :: guidelines, the petitioner contends that he should have been preferred to the third respondent for transfer to the school of choice mentioned in Ext.P5 application. The petitioner submitted Ext.P7 representation dated 27.11.2010 to the first respondent through proper channel. Ext.P7 is pending disposal. 2. Though several reliefs are prayed for in the Writ Petition including a prayer to quash Ext.P6, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, for the time being, it would be sufficient if Ext.P7 is directed to be considered and disposed of by the first respondent. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P7 representation dated 27.11.2010 submitted by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the third respondent. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. The petitioner shall also send a copy of the Writ Petition and copy of the W.P.(C) NO.35833 OF 2010 :: 3 :: judgment before the third respondent by registered post and he shall produce proof of the same before the first respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/