IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2010 / 27TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14903 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K. PUSHPAVALLY, W/O. SATHEESH CHANDRAN, AGED 54 YEARS, CHANDRA NIVAS, PALLU.P.O, NALUTHARA, MAHE. BY ADV. SRI.PHILJO VARUGHESE PHILIPS SRI.G.KESU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, THIURUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, KASARAGOD. BY GP SRI.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).14903/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 17th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner is presently working as Secretary of Puthige Grama Panchayath in Kasargode District. She is to retire on superannuation on 31.3.2011. When Ext.P1 draft list of transfer order was published, she was proposed to be transferred to Eranjoli Grama Panchayat in Kannur District. However when Ext.P2 final transfer order was published, she was ordered to be transferred and posted to Naduvil Grama Panchayat which is also in Kannur District. On publication of Ext.P2, she submitted Ext.P3 representation to the 1st respondent requesting accommodation in Pannyannur Grama Panchayat in Kottayam which, according to the petitioner, is a more convenient location. The challenge against Ext.P2 order is basically on the ground that it is in violation of Ext.P4 transfer guidelines. 2. Petitioner has no case that the post she is not holding is a transferable post. Therefore, even deviating from the guidelines W.P.(C).14903/10 2 Government is empowered to transfer a Government servant provided such a transfer in the exigencies of service. In such a situation, petitioner cannot maintain a challenge against the transfer order entirely on Ext.P4 guidelines. That apart, I also notice that Ext.P2 order was passed as early as on 13.4.2010. 3. In view of the above, I think it will be appropriate that the 1st respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3, if such a representation has been received and is pending. This the 1st respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs