IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2008 / 9TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 22998 of 2008(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.C.MATHEW, AGED 50, S/O. ITTICHERIYATHU, CHIEF COMMERCIAL CLERK-III, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRICHUR, PERMANENT ADDRESS, KUNNAKKATTU, KALLIPADAM.P.O, SHORNUR. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY SMT.R.R.REJITHA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN.P.O, CHENNAI-3. 2. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM-14. 4. THE CHIEF VIGILANCE OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PART TOWN.P.O, CHENNAI-3. 5. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM-14. BY SRI.P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, SST.SOLICITOR GENERAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C)NO. 22998 OF 2008 ============================ DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF JULY 2008 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J. The applicant in O.A.No.385/2008 is the writ petitioner. Ext.P2 O.A.was filed challenging Annexure-A1 order dated 20-6-2008 by which the petitioner has been transferred from Trichur to Alappuzha at the instance of the Vigilance Wing of the Railways. He filed Annexure-A4 representation dated 30-6-2008 and thereafter approached the Central Administrative Tribunal challenging the transfer. The C.A.T. was not impressed by the contentions of the petitioner. The grounds taken were held to be not sufficient to interfere with the transfer order by the Central Administrative Tribunal. In the result, the O.A. was dismissed by Ext.P1. This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P1. 2. The learned counsel Sri. T.C.Govindaswamy appearing for the petitioner submitted that Annexure-A1 has been issued in violation of the Railway Board's orders, Annexures A7 and A8. If that be so, the petitioner has to represent pointing out the above aspect before the WPC.22998/2008 -2- competent authority of the Railways. We see no such representation has been made. It is settled position in law that this Court cannot interfere with a transfer order, unless it is shown to be illegal in the sense it violates some statutory provision or is vitiated by mala fides. Guidelines are meant to guide and not to govern. So the violation of guidelines is not treated as an illegality for the purpose of interference with the transfer under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to represent before the competent authority of the Railways, his grievance regarding the issuance of Annexure-A1 transfer order in violation of Annexures A7 and A8. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI JUDGE ks.