Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KRISHNANKUTTY, S/O. PARANGODAN versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


KRISHNANKUTTY, S/O. PARANGODAN v. STATE OF KERALA - WP(C) No. 34575 of 2006(N) [2007] RD-KL 21 (1 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 34575 of 2006(N)

1. KRISHNANKUTTY, S/O. PARANGODAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

2. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT,

3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT,

4. SECRETARY,

For Petitioner :SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.K.DENESAN

Dated :01/01/2007

O R D E R

K.K.DENESAN, J.

WP(C)No. 34575 OF 2006

Dated this the 1st January, 2007.



JUDGMENT

Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P1 order passed by the Deputy Director of Panchayats, Palakkad transferring the petitioner from the post of Upper Division Clerk, Mannarkkad Grama Panchayat to Thenkara Grama Panchayat, this writ petition has been filed. Ext.P1 was passed consequent on the shifting of one post of Upper Division Clerk to the Thenkara Grama Panchayat. It is contended that the petitioner has been arbitrarily chosen for transfer and the third respondent did not examine whether any other person could have been transferred and posted in Thenkara Grama Panchayat.

2. Govt. Pleader on instruction submits that the distance between Mannarkkad Grama Panchayat office and Thenkara Grama Panchayat is about 3 kms. and the petitioner cannot put forward any valid contention as there is no room for legal grievance.

3. I do not propose to consider the contentions of either of the parties since the petitioner has rightly filed Ext.P3 representation before the Director of Panchayat who has got the authority to look into the order passed by the third respondent, and if necessary, to make WPC 34575/2006 2 appropriate corrections. Hence this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider Ext.P3, pass orders in accordance with law and communicate the order to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, in any event, within one month on the petitioner producing a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. K.K.DENESAN Judge jj


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.