Disposed

Pradeep Kumar v. Senior Joint Diretor (P.S) and Others

Kerala HC8 Jun 2010WP(C)/16429/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged a transfer order posting the petitioner, a lecturer in civil engineering, to Vennikkulam. The High Court noted conflicting claims regarding stream separation and sanctioned posts, holding that substantive merits required Government consideration rather than judicial intervention. The court directed the petitioner to file a representation with the Government to resolve

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to approach the Government by filing a representation within one week to resolve the grievance regarding the transfer order.

Pradeep Kumar Vs Senior Joint Diretor (P.S) and Others — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2010 / 18TH JYAISTHA 1932

¶5

WP(C).No. 16429 of 2010(C)

¶6

----------------------------------

¶7

PETITIONER(S): --------------------

¶8

PRADEEP KUMAR, LECTURER IN CIVIL ENGINEERING, GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, KALAMASSERY, RESIDING AT PRASADAM, KORASSERY, CHENDAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.D.SOMASUNDARAM

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

-----------------------

¶12

1. SENIOR JOINT DIRECTOR (P.S.), OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

2. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

3. LALITHA .P.K, LECTURER IN CIVIL, SREE RAMA GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, THRIPRAYAR, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶15

R1-2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.SANDESH RAJA

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No. 16429 of 2010(C)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

Petitioners Exhibits:

¶20

Ext.P1: Copy of the application dated 20.1.2010 Ext.P2: Copy of th preliminary list. Ext.P3: Copy of the representation submitted by the petitioner. Ext.P4: Copy of the order No. EC5/10751/2010 dated 21.5.2010 Ext.P5: Copy of the representation.

¶21

/True copy/

¶22

P.A. To Judge

¶23

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J

¶24

- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 16429 OF 2010

¶25

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8^th day of June, 2010

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

This writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P4 order of transfer whereby the petitioner was posted to Govt. Polytechnic College, Vennikkulam in Pathanamthitta District. According to the petitioner he came to Govt. Polytechnic College, Kalamassery which is his home station on 21.05.2007. As per Ext.P1 he had requested for a transfer specifying the places of choice as Sree Rama Govt. Polytechnic College, Thriprayar and Maharaja Technological Institute, Thrissur, in that order. The petitioner has raised another contention that ignoring the request of the 3^rd respondent for a posting to Kalamassery, she has been transferred and posted to Sree Rama Govt. Polytechnic College, Thriprayar. According to the petitioner the 3^rd respondent had requested for a transfer to Kalamassery and not for a transfer to Thriprayar. In such circumstances, considering their respective requests petitioner could have been transferred and posted at Thriprayar and the

¶28

WPC.16429/2010

¶29

: 2 :

¶30

3^rd respondent could have been posted at Govt. Polytechnic College, Kalamassery. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents one and two in this writ petition. In Para 3 it is

¶31

stated as hereunder:

¶32

“The 3^rd respondent herein coming under the General Polytechnic stream. The Women's Polytechnic and General Polytechnics are two separate streams under this Department. They have different method of appointment. But for administrative and academic reasons during the past years many staff of General Polytechnics were posted in the Women's Polytechnic Colleges under special circumstances. But due to many reason, this practice is stopped. Hence during this General Transfer no incumbents under General Polytechnic streams were given transfer to Women's Polytechnic Stream. Hence the request of third respondent at Women's Polytechnic College, Kalamassery could not take into consideration.”

¶33

According to respondents one and two as per the standard staff pattern prescribed under G.O.(Ms) No.158/98/H.Edn. dated 21.12.1998, the sanctioned post of Lecturer in Civil Engineering at Government Polytechnic College, Kalamassery is only 4. However, at present, there are 5 incumbents including the petitioner working in the said institution and that the petitioner had already completed 3 years there. According to them, it is in these circumstances that considering the availability of an open vacancy of Lecturer in Civil Engineering at Govt. Polytechnic College, Vennikulam the petitioner was transferred and posted there. The petitioner

¶34

WPC.16429/2010

¶35

: 3 :

¶36

has filed a reply affidavit refuting the contentions made by the respondents in the said statement. According to him, several persons from the General Polytechnic Stream are still working in Women's Polytechnic Colleges and therefore, there was no justifiable reason for not considering the claim of the 3^rd respondent for a posting at Women's Polytechnic, Kalamassery. That apart, it is his contention that despite the existence of Government Order dated 21.12.1998, Lecturers in excess of the sanctioned post have been working in Government Polytechnic, Kalamassery. According to the petitioner Ext.P6 would belie the contention raised by the respondents.

¶37

In view of the rival contentions, I am of the view that the claim of the petitioner requires consideration by the Government. According to the petitioner, persons having longer tenure in one station, that is more than 25 years, are still continuing in such stations. Whether Lecturers could be accommodated in Government Polytechnic College, Kalamassery despite existence of G.O. dated 21.12.1998 and whether an incumbent from the General Polytechnic Stream could be accommodated in Women's Polytechnic Stream etc. are matters that can be considered by the Government.

¶38

In these circumstances, without making any observation

¶39

WPC.16429/2010

¶40

: 4 :

¶41

as to the merits of the rival contentions this writ petition is disposed of as here under:-

¶42

The petitioner is given liberty to approach the Government raising his grievances against Ext.P4 by filing a representation within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. In case such a representation is received from the petitioner, the Government shall consider and pass orders thereon within a further period of four weeks with notice to the persons who are likely to be effected in the event of an order in favour of the petitioner. To enable the Government to comply with the aforesaid directions the petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the representation, before the Government.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE

¶45

jma

¶46

//true copy//

¶47

P.A to Judge

Pradeep Kumar v. Senior Joint Diretor (P.S) and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Kumar v. Senior Joint Diretor (P.S) and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.N.C.Sreekumar Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Valsamma Paul Vs Cochin University of Science & Technoloy

Jayaprabha.P Vs Director, Higher Secondary

K.Rajan Vs State of Kerala

F.Raheedakunju Vs State of Kerala

The Manager Vs the State of Kerala