IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 11422 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHAMLA BEEVI, HEAD CLERK, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT SOIL CONSERVATION OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA, RESIDING AT BASHEELA MANZIL, 'AANAKUTHI', KUMMANNOOR, KONNI. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.RAJESH SMT.A.K.PREETHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNEMTN, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT GOVT. SECRETARAIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE (SOIL CONSERVATION UNIT), SREE SABARI BUILDING, CHALA.P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT SOIL CONSERVATION OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. THE DISTRICT SOIL CONSERVATION OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. 5. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF SOIL CONSERVATION, KATTAPPANA. 6. P.G.PHILIP, HEAD CLERK, OFFICER OF THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF SOIL CONSERVATION, KATTAPPANA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON 31/03/2010 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 11422 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Head Clerk presently working in the District Soil Conservation Office, Pathanamthitta. As per Ext.P2 order dated 16.3.2010 the petitioner is ordered to be transferred and posted to District Soil Conservation Office, Kottayam. This Writ Petition is filed challenging Ext.P2 order. 2. The contention of the petition is that Ext.P2 order has been passed in violation of Ext.P3 guidelines. According to him, he is yet to complete three years in the present station and at the same time, sixth respondent, who is ordered to be posted in place of the petitioner had not even completed 2 years at her present station. Raising all such contentions, the petitioner has approached the second respondent through Ext.P4 representation. 3. Essentially, the contention of the petitioner is that Ext.P2 has passed in violation of the norms in Ext.P3. Those are matters which are to be looked into by the authorities concerned. The petitioner has already approached the second WPC.11422 of 2010 : 2 : respondent by raising all such contentions. The 2nd respondent is competent to look into the said grievances of the petitioner. Therefore, without making any observation as to the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. In Ext.P2 order itself, it is stated that the incumbents who are placed under order of transfer need be relieved after 31.3.2010. In view of the said position available from Ext.P2, there shall be a further direction to the second respondent to permit the petitioner to continue in the present station till a decision is taken in terms of the direction in this judgment. The petitioner will also be at liberty to submit a representation supplementing Ext.P4 while forwarding coy of this judgment. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge WPC.11422 of 2010 : 3 :