Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3937 Ker
Judgement Date : 3 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.25649 OF 2020(E)
PETITIONER :-
PREMKIRAN A.S
DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
INTERNAL AUDIT WING, HEAD OFFICE,
KERALA WATER AUTHORITY ,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
SRI.K.S.ANIL
RESPONDENTS :-
1 THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
JALABHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.
2 THE CHEIF ENGINEER, (HRD & GL),
KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
JALABHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.
3 SHYNE T.S.,
DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
STOCK VERIFICATION SUB DIVISION, NO.1.
KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.
4 GEORGE P.J.,
DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS OFFICER, SEWERAGE DIVISION,
KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, PATTOOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.
BY ADV. SMT.MARY BENJEMIN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 03.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.25649 OF 2020(E)
-: 2 :-
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2021
This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P8 order passed by the
respondents in pursuance to Ext.P7 judgment of this Court. The
contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner as against
Ext.P8 is that though Ext.P7 directed the consideration of the claim of
the petitioner with hearing to the petitioner as well as the other
affected persons, Ext.P8 order discloses that the petitioner was heard
on one day and the alleged affected parties, that is, respondents 3 and
4 were heard separately. Ext.P8 order has been passed stating that
the 4th respondent has a better claim than the petitioner for a posting
at Kollam and that in the second station opted by the petitioner, one
Sheela Kumari is already holding the post, who has not completed
three years. It is stated that the petitioner can be accommodated at
his third choice.
2. By Ext.P7 judgment, the direction was to consider the
representations preferred by the petitioner in the light of the transfer
guidelines and after hearing the petitioner as well as the affected
persons. The fact that the petitioner was heard on 20.10.2020 and
the affected persons were on 21.10.2020 is apparent from Ext.P8. In
the above view of the matter, I am of the opinion that there should be WP(C).No.25649 OF 2020(E)
a composite hearing conducted and the respective claims are liable to
be considered in accordance with law.
In the result, Ext.P8 is set aside. There will be a direction
to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for transfer
in accordance with the guidelines, after hearing the petitioner as well
as respondents 3 and 4 through any appropriate means including by
video conferencing. Orders shall be passed within a period of three
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE
Jvt/3.2.2021 WP(C).No.25649 OF 2020(E)
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 29.05.2020.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OPTION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NORMS AND GUIDE LINES ISSUED BY THE WATER AUTHORITY.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT GENERAL TRANSFER LIST.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 12.08.2020.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATION FLIED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 14.08.2020
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 07/10/2020 IN WPC NO. 20751/2020.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05/11/2020
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!