Nidhi Jose vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 1110 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

  TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 22TH POUSHA, 1942

                  WP(C).No.27936 OF 2020(N)


PETITIONER :-

            NIDHI JOSE, AGED 38 YEARS
            W/O.NIKIL JOSE, CLUSTER CO ORDINATOR,
            BLOCK RESOURCES CENTRE, KOOTHATTUKULAM.

            BY ADVS.
            SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN
            SMT.RESMI G. NAIR

RESPONDENTS :-

      1     STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
            GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
            GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

      2     THE STATE PROJECT DIRECTOR,
            SAMAGRA SHIKSHA KERALA, SSA BHAVAN,
            NANDAVANAM ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.

      3     THE DISTRICT PROJECT CO-ORDINATOR,
            SRV LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL COMPOUND,
            ERNAKULAM - 682 011.

      4     THE BLOCK PROGRAMME CO-ORDINATOR,
            BLOCK RESOURCES CENTRE, KOOTHATTUKULAM - 686 662.

      5     THE BLOCK PROGRAMME CO-ORDIANTOR,
            BLOCK RESOURCES CENTRE, ANGAMALY,
            ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 308.

      6     THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
            ERNAKULAM - 682 017.

            BY SMT.NISHA BOSE, SR.GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.27936 OF 2020(N)

                                     -: 2 :-


                                 JUDGMENT

Dated this the 12th day of January 2021

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

"(i) To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P2 and quash the same to the extent it transfers the petitioner from Koothattukulam to Angamaly or in the alternative issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to dispose of Ext.P5 in the light of Exts.P6 to P9 without delay."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner had been working as

LPSA in the Sreebhadra Lower Primary School, Kidangoor since

2.6.2004. Due to reduction in student strength, she was retrenched

from service on 15.7.2010 and had been appointed as Cluster Co-

ordinator at Block Resources Centre, Angamaly. By Ext.P1 order, the

6th respondent had granted transfer as sought for by the petitioner to

a vacancy at Koothattukulam. Thereafter, it is submitted that by

Ext.P2 order dated 2.11.2020, the 3 rd respondent has issued orders

transferring the petitioner from Koothattukulam to Angamaly

allegedly on administrative exigencies. The learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner had approached this Court and WP(C).No.27936 OF 2020(N)

Ext.P4 judgment was rendered directing that the transfer be kept in

abeyance as long as the Model Code of Conduct for the election is in

force. It is submitted that the petitioner has preferred R.P.

No.956/2020 and was permitted to challenge the order of transfer on

other grounds as well by Ext.P10 order. It is submitted by the learned

counsel for the petitioner that there is absolutely no need to transfer

the petitioner and even in case the transfer is required, the 3 rd

respondent, who is a lower authority, cannot modify the orders passed

by the 6th respondent.

4. A counter affidavit has been placed on record by

respondents 2, 3, 4 and 5. It is submitted that the orders of transfer

are issued in administrative exigencies and that there are sound and

valid reasons informing such transfers.

5. Though reply affidavits have also been placed on record, I

am of the opinion that since Ext.P1 order of transfer had been issued

by the 6th respondent, it is for the 6 th respondent himself to consider

the complaint of the petitioner against Ext.P2 order.

In the above view of the matter, this writ petition is

disposed of directing the 6th respondent to consider the claim of the

petitioner for retention at Koothattukulam. The issue will be

considered after putting the petitioner as well as the 3 rd respondent

and any other affected parties on notice and hearing as required shall WP(C).No.27936 OF 2020(N)

be done through any appropriate means, including video

conferencing. The petitioner shall prefer a representation before the

6th respondent within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment. Orders shall be passed within a period of one month

thereafter. Till such time, the interim order granted shall remain in

force.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Jvt/12.1.2021 WP(C).No.27936 OF 2020(N)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER NO. B6/6517/15/K. DIS DATED 27.04.2015 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF NO. A1-40/19/SSK EKM DATED 02.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN WPC NO. 23973/2020 (WITHOUT EXHIBITS).

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.11.2020 IN WPC NO.

23973 OF 2020 OF THIS HONBLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.12.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE RESPONDENT 1 AND

EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF G.O. (MS) NO. 177/2012/G.EDN, DATED 5.6.2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF G.O.(P) NO. 134/2016/G.EDN. DATED 5.8.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF COMMUNICATION NO. H(2)/35985/2016/DPI DATED 08.08.2016 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF CIRCULAR NO. J2/48/18/G.EDN. DATED 24.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.12.2020 IN R.P.No.

956/2020 IN W.P.(C)No.23973/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE No.BRC/KKLM/127/20-21 DATED 15.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE