IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 23026 of 2010(S) -------------------------- OA.757/2008 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF INFORMATION & BROADCASTING NEW DELHI. 2. PRASAR BHARATI BROADCASTING CORPORATION OF INDIA NEW DELHI REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL PRASAR BHARATI BROADCASTING CORPORATION OF INDIA DOORDARSHAN, NEW DELHI. 4. THE DIRECTOR DOORDARSHAN KENDRA, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-43 BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN,SC DOORDARSHAN KENDRA,TVM RESPONDENT: --------------- H.MOHAMMED ASHREF FILM, VIDEO EDITOR, DOORDARSHAN KENDRA KUDAPPANAKKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 005. ADV. SRI.P.M.KUNJIMOIDEENKUTTY FOR R1 SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH FOR R1 SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN FOR R1 SRI.V.R.REKESH FOR R1 SRI.V.S.SHIRAZ BAVA FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.757/2008 BEFORE THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH DT.19.12.2008. P2: TRUE COPY OF REPLY FILED BY PETITIONERS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, DT.25.2.2009. P3: TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN O.A. NO.757/2008 DT.15.6.2009. P4: TRUE COPY OF OFFICE ORDER NO.22/2008-S.I. DT.11.12.08. P5: TRUE COPY OF TRANSFER POLICY FOR PRASAR BHARATI EMPLOYEES. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.23026 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 11th day of July, 2011. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Dispute raised in the W.P.(C) is whether the petitioners rightly transferred the respondent from Trivandrum to Chennai. Standing Counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is the policy of the petitioners to give postings in Kerala to those employed outside. Petitioners have specifically stated the case of one Sureshkumar whom they want to accommodate in Trivandrum in the place of the respondent who was working there for 19 years without any transfer whatsoever. Though Tribunal upheld in principle the transfer policy of the petitioners, they only said that while considering the interest of the organisation, the employees' interest also should be kept in mind. We are in complete agreement with the observation of the Tribunal because in order to get loyal service from the employees, they have to be accommodated as far as possible in the station suitable to them. This does not mean that any one has a right to continue for long periods in a 2 station. The problem is created only by the petitioners who do not have any policy in regard to transfers. We do not think there is any scope for keeping this writ petition pending because the impugned transfer was proposed two and a half years back. We give absolute freedom to the petitioners to transfer the respondent, if so required, for any good or valid reason or to provide posting to somebody who has been working outside Kerala for long time. W.P.(C) is disposed of declaring that the impugned order of the Tribunal will not stand in the way of considering transfers not only for respondent, but for others stationed in Kerala or outside Kerala in accordance with the norms. If guidelines do not justify transfer of the respondent from Kerala, then transfer can be to stations outside Trivandrum, which again has to be considered in accordance with the guidelines and if the guidelines need to be changed, it is for the petitioners to consider the same. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms