C KUNHIKRISHNAN Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was originally appointed as a U.D. Typist in the Civil Judicial Department. THE petitioner sought inter- departmental transfer to Labour Department and he was transferred to the Labour Department. While working in the Labour Department, he again sought inter-departmental transfer to the Social Welfare Department, which was also granted. While working there, the petitioner was deployed to Local Self Government Department where he is working now. THE petitioner wanted to be transferred back to the Judicial Department on the ground that under Rule 8 of Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, he continues to hold lien in the Judicial Department, insofar as he has not been confirmed in either the Labour Department or the Social Welfare Department. THE petitioner relies on the decision of a Full Bench of this Court in Balakrishnan Nair V. Ram Mohan Nair, 1998(1) KLT 766 (FB) in support of his contentions. THE petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:

(2.) BOTH the Government and the High Court have filed counter affidavits denying the claims of the petitioner. According to them, what is relevant is Ext.R2(a) G.O(Ms) 4/61/PD dated 2.1.1961, which governs inter-departmental transfers, paragraph 2 of which reads thus:

(3.) AS rightly pointed out by the respondents, the petitioner is entitled to repatriation only if either of the two conditions in paragraph 2 of Ext. R2(a) Government Order is satisfied. AS far as the Judicial Department is concerned, the petitioner was given inter-departmental transfer to Labour Department. Therefore, the petitioner can aspire to come back to Judicial Department only if there is no vacancy for the petitioner in the Labour Department or the pay of U.D. Clerk in the Labour Department is less than that of the U.D. Clerk in the Judicial Department. AS far as the first condition is concerned, the petitioner himself sought inter-departmental transfer from Labour Department to Social Welfare Department and that was not due to want of vacancy in the Labour Department. AS far as the scale of pay is concerned, in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit of the 2nd respondent, it is specifically stated that the scale of pay of U.D. Clerk in the Judicial Department is Rs. 6680- 10790 and that of U.D. Clerk in the Labour Department is also Rs. 6680-10790. Therefore, neither of the two conditions in paragraph 2 of Ext. R2(a) is satisfied for enabling the petitioner to get repatriation to the Judicial Department. Therefore, there is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed.