IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2011 / 19TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25989 of 2011(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ HAREENDRAN NAIR.R, DUPLICATING OPERATOR, PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICE,KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.SREEKANTH S.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, DIRECTORATE OF AGRICULTURE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 001. 2. SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, DIRECTORATE OF AGRICULTURE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 001. 3. RAJEEV, DUPLICATING OPERATOR, DIRECTORATE OF AGRICULTURE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.25989/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF REQUEST FOR TRANSFER DATED 22.7.2011. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR DATED 13.5.1987. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF 2ND RESPONDENT DATED NIL. EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 26.9.2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.25989 of 2011-W. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11th October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was working as a Duplicating Operator in the Principal Agriculture Office, Kottayam. According to him, he is a permanent resident of Thiruvananthapuram district. He sought a transfer to Thiruvananthapuram when he learnt that a vacancy of Duplicating Operator is available in the Directorate of Agriculture due to retirement on 31.3.2011. Though he made a representation well in advance, his complaint is that his request was turned down and the said post was given to a lady in Thiruvananthapuram district, who had been promoted as a Duplicating Operator on the very same day. Thereafter, according to him, on 10.6.2011 he was transferred to the Principal Agriculture Office, Kottayam, where he is presently working. WP(C).No.25989/2011-W. 2 2. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the transfer order has been issued by the second respondent, who is not competent to issue such transfer order. The petitioner also contends that the rejection of his request for transfer in preference to a request made by another lady is without any justification. It is the further case of the petitioner that a vacancy has presently arisen following the deputation of another employee to the Kerala State Beverages Corporation. Though the petitioner has sought a transfer to the said vacancy and no orders have been passed till date. 3. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the petitioner had submitted a request on 23.5.2011 for a transfer to Kottayam. Accordingly, the said request was granted and he was posted at Kottayam on 10.6.2011. Thereafter, a request for transfer to Thiruvananthapurma within such a short span of time was unjustified and not liable to be granted. However, since Ext.P4 is pending consideration, the same would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed thereon WP(C).No.25989/2011-W. 3 by the first respondent, without delay. 4. In view of the fact that the petitioner has been transferred to Kottayam on his request, dated 23.5.2011, he cannot be heard to complain against the said transfer. He has also submitted Ext.P4 request seeking a convenient posting to Thiruvananthapuram. Since the matter is pending consideration of the first respondent, it is not necessary for me to consider the merits of the petitioner's claim at this stage. 5. This writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the request of the petitioner contained in Ext.P4 in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, (Judge) Kvs/-