Disposed
V.Vijesh, v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation
Kerala HCWP(C)/23902/2021
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE…
What the court decided
AI extract
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 MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 11TH KARTHIKA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 23902 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
V.VIJESH, AGED 44 YEARS CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION (KSRTC), CHALAKUDY UNIT, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 307.
BY ADVS. V.PREMCHAND SURYA MOHAN P.
RESPONDENTS:
BY ADV.SRI.DEEPU THANKAN SC KSRTC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
W.P.(C)No.23902 of 2021
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is employed as Driver Grade-II, in the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC). The petitioner entered service in the year, 2015 and joined at Peroorkada Unit and is working in the said Unit since then. The KSRTC published Ext.P1 draft list of employees to be transferred and invited objection to the said list. The petitioner's name was included in Ext.P1 draft list under the head “Transfer on the basis of the requests made by the employees”. The petitioner submitted Ext.P3 petition before the 3rd respondent against the draft list stating that he has not requested for any transfer. The KSRTC later published Ext.P4 order of transfer of employees. The petitioner's name is included in Ext.P4 at Sl.No.148 and the petitioner is transferred to Chalakudy. The petitioner has filed Ext.P5 representation before the 3rd respondent stating that he has never requested for any transfer from Peroorkada Unit to Chalakudy and there are other senior drivers in that station who are liable to be transferred before the petitioner is transferred
3
W.P.(C)No.23902 of 2021
from that station.
Sri.Deepu Thankan the learned standing counsel for the respondents.
In the nature of the limited relief prayed for by the petitioner and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to take up Ext.P5 for consideration and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of two months from today. I make it clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of Ext.P5 representation submitted by the petitioner.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
JUDGE
ska
4
W.P.(C)No.23902 of 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23902/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF ORDER DATED 16.09.2021 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P1 A ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE RELEVANT PORTION RELIED IN EXHIBIT P1. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.09.2021 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 A ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P2. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION 24.09.2021 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 A ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE RELEVANT PORTION RELIED IN EXHIBIT P3. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12.10.2021 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 A ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE RELEVANT PORTION RELIED IN EXHIBIT P4. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.10.2021 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 A ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P5.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petitioner should be directed to submit his representation regarding the transfer order for consideration.
Whether the lower unit's representation regarding seniority and lack of transfer request can be legitimately considered.
V. VIJESH
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, (ADMINISTRATION), KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court