IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32293 of 2008(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KALYANI.P, HEAD SURVEYOR, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY & LAND RECORDS (RESURVEY), VADAKKENCHERRY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.K.S.SAIRA SRI.A.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, KERALA SURVEY & LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF SURVEY & LAND RECORDS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. VRINDA.A.K, HEAD SURVEYOR, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, RESURVEY, THODUPUZHA, SURVEY & LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 3/11/2008, THE COURT ON 03/11/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ====================================== W.P.(C)No.32293 of 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 3rd day of November 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is presently working as Head Surveyor in the Kerala Survey and Land Records Department at Wadakkancherry in Thrissur District. She belongs to Mekkad in Nedumbassery Village of Ernakulam District. Her grievance is that though she had by Ext.P2 representation dated 24.9.2008 requested the Director of Survey and Land Records for transfer and posting to Ernakulam District, when Ext.P3 order of transfer was issued on 30.10.2008, her claim was not considered and the vacancies in Ernakulam District were filled up by appointing the third respondent and two others. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P3 to the extent it transfers the third respondent from Thodupuzha to Thrikkakara and prays for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the second respondent to post her in the office of the Assistant Director of Resurvey, Thrikkakkara. 2. The Apex Court has in State of U.P.v Gobardhan Lal [2004(11) SCC 402] held that this Court cannot in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assess the administrative niceties and exigencies of the situation and act as an appellate authority over the decision taken by the transferring authority. It was held that an order of W.P.(C)No.32293/2008 2 transfer cannot be interfered with unless it is issued in violation of any statutory rule or issued by an incompetent authority or is shown to be one vitiated by malafides. It was further held that the guidelines governing transfer do not confer any enforceable right on the employee and that unless concrete materials are produced, allegations of malafides should not be acted upon. In the instant case, it has not been shown to me that the order of transfer evidenced by Ext.P3 is passed by an incompetent authority or that it is in violation of any statutory rule. It is also not pleaded or proved that the order of transfer is vitiated by malafides. In such circumstances, the challenge to the transfer of the third respondent to Thrikkakkara as per Ext.P3 cannot be entertained. 3. Then the only prayer that survives to be considered is whether the second respondent can be directed to transfer and post the petitioner at Thrikkakkara as requested by her. The petitioner submits that she has recently undergone a surgery and has been advised to take rest for atleast three months. She also states that she has to look after her aged mother and to bring up her young daughter. Setting out these facts, she has moved the second respondent by submitting Ext.P2 representation seeking a transfer and posting in Ernakulam District. The question whether having regard to the difficulties experienced by the petitioner, she can be accommodated at some office in Ernakulam District, is primarily a matter for the second respondent to decide. The second respondent is yet to take a decision on Ext.P2. Such being the W.P.(C)No.32293/2008 3 situation, while dismissing the writ petition, I direct the second respondent to consider Ext.P2 and take a decision thereon expeditiously and in any event within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE css/