The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a transfer order without adjudicating merits. It directed the 4th respondent to consider the petitioner's pending representation and pass appropriate orders within six weeks.
A direction to the 4th respondent to consider the pending representation and pass appropriate orders within six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/24TH KARTHIKA 1934
WP(C).No. 22388 of 2012 (W)
PETITIONER:
MADHUSOODHANAN ASARI, AGED 46 YEARS S/O.GANGADHARAN ASARI, THAZHEPACHA HOUSE, ANAD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI.P.G.PRAMOD SRI.KANDAMPULLY RAHUL
RESPONDENTS:
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 22388 of 2012 (W)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF ORDER DATED 18/02/2005 ISSUED BY THE MEMBER SECRETARY OF KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT APPOINTING THE PETITIONER AS HELPER -G1.
EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10/09/2012 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR JNTBGRI ,PALODE.
EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13/09/2012 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCNE TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT.
EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13/09/2012 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DIRECTOR, JNTBGRI, PALODE.
EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED 13/09/2012 ISSUED BY THE DR.RAJEEV KUMAR.R.CONSULTANT SURGEON CERTIFYING THAT THE PETITIONER IS MEDICALLY UNFIT FOR PROLONGED TRAVEL.
/true copy/
P.S. TO JUDGE.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
W.P. © No.22388 OF 2012
Dated this the 15th November, 2012
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is aggrieved of Ext. P1 order, whereby he has
been transferred from Jawaharlal Nehru Tropical Botanic Garden and Research Institute (JNTBGRI), Palode to Saraswathy Thankavelu Extension Centre at Puthenthop. The petitioner contends that the transfer order has adversely affected the petitioner, since he is a cancer patient and that he is receiving treatment from the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. It is also contended that the present station to which the petitioner is transferred, is at a distance of nearly 50 Kms. from his residence and he is finding it very difficult to make both the ends to meet, particularly when his father is also bed ridden because of physical ailments and his mother is a chronic cardiac patient .
2
W.P. © No.22388 OF 2012
pointing out that there is absolutely no merit or bonafides in the writ petition. Various insinuating circumstances in respect of deeds and misdeeds of the petitioner are also referred to in the statement. It is further pointed out that the petitioner had committed a serious misconduct, which was being proceeded with separately by way of disciplinary proceedings and it was in the said circumstance, that the competent authority found it fit and proper to shift the petitioner from the present place to the transferred place, to maintain harmonious relationship among the employees and on administrative exigency, lest the petitioner should be placed under suspension pending disciplinary proceedings. It is also pointed out that the station to which the petitioner now stands transferred is more closer to Trivandrum Medical College, than the place where the Research Institute (at Palode) is located as on date and that he can avail any treatment, if necessary.
3
W.P. © No.22388 OF 2012
grievance projected in Ext.P4, which is pending consideration before the 4th respondent.
After hearing both the sides, the writ petition is disposed of without expressing anything with regard to the merits of the case, but for directing the 4th respondent to consider Ext.P4 representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'six' weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
lk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction to the 4th respondent to consider his pending representation regarding his transfer grievance.
Whether the director of JNTBGRI must pass appropriate orders within six weeks.
P. R. Ramachandra Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
