Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

A.K. RAVEENDRAN, HEALTH SUPERVISOR versus THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


A.K. RAVEENDRAN, HEALTH SUPERVISOR v. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - WP(C) No. 6443 of 2007(P) [2007] RD-KL 4308 (27 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 6443 of 2007(P)

1. A.K. RAVEENDRAN, HEALTH SUPERVISOR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR, URBAN AFFAIRS,

For Petitioner :SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL

For Respondent : No Appearance

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

Dated :27/02/2007

O R D E R

K.K. DENESAN, J.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.6443 OF 2007 P = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Dated this the 27th February, 2007



J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is working as Health Supervisor in the Kottayam Municipality. He has filed Ext. P6 application in the prescribed pro forma before the 2nd respondent showing the place of his choice for a transfer and posting. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will file a representation also before the 2nd respondent in the same lines as he has done as per Ext. P5 addressed to the 1st respondent through proper channel. The reasons which compelled the petitioner to file Ext. P6 have been stated in Ext. P5 and since the petitioner says that he will bring those facts to the notice of the 2nd respondent also, it is not necessary for me to narrate those facts here. I have no reason to assume that those facts will not be considered by the 2nd respondent. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that a vacancy is likely to arise some time in July, 2007 in Vadakara in Kozhikode District and the petitioner being a native of that place, he would like to get posted at Vadakara. WPC No.6443 /2007 -2-

2. I have heard Govt. Pleader for the respondents.

3. In the circumstances, it is only proper that the 2nd respondent considers the request of the petitioner as per Ext. P6 and the representation which he would like to submit in support of Ext. P6. It will be open to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext. P6 at the time of general transfers and if that is not possible his request can be considered against the vacancy likely to arise in July, 2007. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. K.K. DENESAN

JUDGE

jan/


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.