SAGI T.M. Vs. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the petitioner, who is working as the Head of the Department in the School of Medical Education, Gandhinagar, Kottayam, was subjected to transfer through Exhibit P5 to School of Medical Education, Angamaly, which is more than 100 Kms from the present place of working. Complaining of transfer in the middle of the academic year, thus affecting the academic prospects of her child, the petitioner is said to have made Exhibit P6 representation to the Vice Chancellor of the respondent University. In the face of imminent relieving from the present place of posting, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

(3.) THE learned Standing Counsel, on his part, has submitted that not only the petitioner, but also various other people have been transferred through Exhibit P5. He has further contended that if any differentiation is made at this juncture, it makes it impossible for the respondent University to administer properly, inasmuch as transfer is a necessary service concomitant. At any rate, the learned Standing Counsel has pointed out that since Exhibit P6 is pending before the Vice Chancellor, it may not be appropriate for this Court to adjudicate the issue on merits.