IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2009 / 2ND BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 13920 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHRI SREEJESH M.S, SCIENTIFIC ASSISTANT (PHYSIOTHERAPY), MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. G.SUDHAKARAN ACHARY, SCIENTIFIC ASSISTANT (PHYSIOTHERAPY) MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE 4. SHAJI V.P., SCIENTIFIC ASSISTANT (PHYSIOTHERAPY), MEDICAL COLLEGE, THRISSUR 5. THE PRINCIPAL, MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN FOR R3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 R2 & R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.13920/2009-H ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 24th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by the order of transfer, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. The petitioner was working as Scientific Assistant (Physiotherapy) in Medical College, Kozhikode and by Ext.P1 he has been ordered to be transferred to Medical College, Thrissur. The order of transfer has taken effect and the petitioner has joined the transferee station also. The petitioner is aggrieved by the retention of the third respondent, who had been in the same Medical College, according to the petitioner, for the past nine years. It is the case of the petitioner that the third respondent is retained since he is the General Secretary of the All India Association of Physiotherapists, having its Head Quarters at Kozhikode. The petitioner alleges that he has been given the benefit of immunity from transfer as available in G.O.(Ms).No.378/68/PD, dated 18/12/1968 and Circular No.27671/SD2/84/GAD, dated 28/02/1984. The fourth respondent has already completed 3 years at Thrissur. It is the case of the petitioner that the said association is not a recognised one, and hence the third respondent cannot claim any immunity. W.P.(C). No.13920/2009 -:2:- 2. The third respondent has filed a detail counter affidavit opposing the prayers of the petitioner. It is the case of the third respondent that he is an ex-serviceman and, therefore, he is entitled for protection and his wife is working in Government Higher Secondary School, Medical College Campus, Calicut and he also claims that he is the All India General Secretary of All India Association of Physiotherapists. To evidence this, he has produced Exts.R3(b)(i) and R3(b)(ii). The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit also traversing the contentions of the third respondent in the counter affidavit. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the third respondent is not the Secretary of a recognised service organisation. Hence, he is not entitled for immunity from transfer for retention in Kozhikode in terms of the Government Orders. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent it is averred that the third respondent is allowed to continue at Kozhikode on the presumption of the privilege of immunity from transfer being the General Secretary of a registered Association. It is also averred that the petitioner cannot challenge the transfer order on the ground that he should be posted in the station of his choice, and as a Government servant he is W.P.(C). No.13920/2009 -:3:- liable to serve anywhere in the department. 5. In the light of the above, the question is whether the petitioner or the third respondent is entitled to be retained in Kozhikode. Both the parties have raised various claims. Admittedly, going by the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, the third respondent was retained in Kozhikode on the basis of the fact that he is having immunity from transfer. 6. The question whether the third respondent is entitled for the immunity itself is a matter for the decision by the Director of Medical Education. In that view of the matter, I dispose of the writ petition in the following manner:- If the petitioner files a detailed representation before the first respondent seeking to reconsider the order of transfer, the first respondent will consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment after hearing all the parties. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms