IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/30TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WPC.No. 34424 of 2011 (C) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. B. RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, SON OF BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 53 YEARS, UPPER DIVISION CLERK (UNDER SUSPENSION), DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICE OF HEALTH, ALAPPUZHA, (RESIDING AT KOYIKKAL VEEDU, KALAVOOR, ALAPPUZHA). 2. P.S. SUMESH, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.K. SUBHASH, LOWER DIVISION CLERK (UNDER SUSPENSION), DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICE OF HEALTH, ALAPPUZHA, (RESIDING AT PULIMOOTTIL, BEECH WARD, ALAPPUZHA). BY ADVS. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED, SRI.K.E.HAMZA. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. 3. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER (HEALTH), ALAPPUZHA-688 001. 4. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER (HEALTH), WAYANAD DISTRICT-673 121. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.JOSE ADIYODI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-12-2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WPC.No. 34424 of 2011 (C) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CARD OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P1A COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CARD OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A6-8364/2011/DMOH OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EC3-43629/2011/DHS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ED1-02/11/DHS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE MEDICAL BOARD OF 1ST PETITIONER'S SON. EXT.P6 COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.6/2007/P&ARD OF THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P7 COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.12/04/P&ARD OF THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P8 COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P9 COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.34424 of 2011. = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 21st December, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioners, Upper Division Clerks have been placed under suspension in the wake of allegations of misconduct against them. Disciplinary enquiries are in progress into the allegations. As per Ext.P2 order they were suspended from service. Subsequently, as per Ext.P3 they were reinstated in service. Thereafter, by Ext.P4 they have been allotted to the District Medical Officer of Health, Wayanad for being given suitable postings. The petitioners have filed this writ petition being aggrieved by Ext.P4. 2. According to the counsel for the petitioners, there is no direction in the order, Ext.P3 reinstating them that they shall be posted out of Alappuzha district where they were originally working. Therefore, it is contended that Ext.P4 is uncalled for. The petitioners further point out that WP(C).No.34424/2011. 2 they have already submitted Exts.P8 and P9 representations against Ext.P4, contending that they are entitled to be retained in Alappuzha district itself. 3. I have heard the learned Govt.Pleader also. 4. It is clear from the records that disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioners. There are various allegations against them. The allegations are all with reference to the discharge of their duties while posted at Alappuzha. Therefore, I do not find anything wrong in the decision of the authorities to post them to a place far away from Alappuzha district. Accordingly, they have been posted at Wayanad. The contention that Ext.P4 is bad for the reason that there is no direction in Ext.P3 that they be posted out of Alappuzha district is without any substance. The petitioners also rely on various domestic problems that they have, to contend that they are entitled to be retained at Alappuzha. Since disciplinary proceedings are in progress against them, their request for retention at Alappuzha WP(C).No.34424/2011. 3 cannot be accepted. I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned orders. 5. Counsel for the petitioners prays that Exts.P8 and P9 representations pending before the first respondent may be directed to be considered. The learned Govt.Pleader does not oppose the issue of such a direction. 6. In the above circumstances, while dismissing this writ petition, there shall be a direction to the first respondent to consider the representations of the petitioners, evidenced herein by Exts.P8 and P9, in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, (Judge) Kvs/-