The court dismissed the writ appeal against the Single Judge's order rejecting the appellant's challenge to a transfer refusal. Upholding the impugned judgment, the court held there was no specific violation of norms.
Writ Appeal dismissed without costs.
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 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JULY 2013/21ST ASHADHA, 1935
W.A.No.987 of 2013
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).No.14639/2013-D, DATED 19.06.2013 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
APPELLANT/ PETITIONER:-
E. KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.ESWARAN NAMBOOTHIRI, DEVASOM SANTHI, PANAYANCHERRY DEVASWOM, ANCHAL SUB GROUP PUNALUR, RESIDING AT UZHATHARAPPALL ILLOM, THEVANNOOR P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.M.S.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.
RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS:-
SANTHI THAZHAMEL DEVASWOM, ANCHAL, KOLLAM - 691 306.
R1 & R2 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
W.A.No.987 of 2013
APPENDIX
APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES:-
ANNEXURE A - TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.R.O.C.1036/06/EST. DATED 10.7.2006.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:-
NIL.
- TRUE COPY -
Manjula Chellur, C.J. & K.Vinod Chandran, J.
W.A.No.987 of 2013
Dated this, the 12th day of July, 2013
JUDGMENT
K.Vinod Chandran,J.
The appellant had unsuccessfully challenged the denial of his first option in the transfer request submitted by him before the 2nd respondent. The appeal filed by him was rejected and the impugned judgment refused to interfere with the transfer.
the 3rd respondent are employed as “Santhi” under the 1st respondent-Devaswom and have been working in the same Group. As per Exhibit P1 norms, the transfers within a Group has to be made by the Assistant Commissioner and those outside the Group are to be made by the Devaswom Commissioner. The appellant, admittedly, is senior to the 3rd respondent as far as their over all service in the Devaswom Board is concerned. However, within the Group at their respective stations, the 3rd respondent has been working for a longer period than the appellant.
- 2 -
W.A.No.987 of 2013
he had opted for. We do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge.
We dismiss the Writ Appeal, without costs.
Sd/Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice
Sd/K.Vinod Chandran, Judge.
vku/-
( true copy )
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Single Judge erred in not interfering with the impugned judgment refusing transfer.
Whether station seniority should be reckoned over overall seniority for transfer within a Group.
E. Krishnan Namboodiri
The Travancore Devaswom Board
R.Rajithan Potti
Dr. Manjula Chellur
K. Vinod Chandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
