IMPORTANT POINT
Transfer of government employees is a condition of service; legal rights to remain at a specific post are not guaranteed unless statutory violations or mala fides are established.

JUDGMENT :

Muralee Krishna, J.

This writ appeal is filed under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 , by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.34954 of 2024, being dissatisfied by the judgment dated 14.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Certiorari to quash Ext.P5 order of transfer dated 01.10.2024 issued by the 4^th respondent Deputy Chief Engineer (General), Kerala Water Authority transferring the appellant to PH Section, Kozhinjampara from Palakkad Water Supply Scheme Section (‘PWSS Section’ in short), Malampuzha and permit him to continue in the present station was dismissed.

2. According to the appellant, he is a differently abled person with 60% locomotor disability, presently working as Head Operator in the 1^st respondent Water Authority in the PWSS Section, Malampuzha since 20.03.2010. As per the Government orders, differently abled persons having disability of 60% and above are given protection from transfer. Apart from protecting such persons from transfer for 5 years, the protection in the post has been extended until any other person with disability of 60% and above makes a claim for the very same post. It was in violation of such norms, Ext.P5 transfer order was issued by the 4^th respondent transferring the appellant to a distance of 15 kilometers away from his house. Hence, the appellant filed the writ petition.

3. By noting that as per the order dated 16.05.2024, the Government has granted permission to transfer differently disabled persons on completion of 5 years in a station, to the next station or if no vacancy is available in the next station to the immediate next district and also noting that the place to which the appellant was transferred is only 15/17 kilometers away from his residence which is not in violation of service conditions or malafide or arbitrary, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant is a person suffering from 60% locomotor disability which is evident from Ext.P1 certificate of disability as well as the unique disability ID card issued to him. As per Ext.P6 order dated 29.08.2017 issued by the Government, the persons having disability of more than 60% are given protection from transfer for 5 years. In that order it is further clarified that after the aforesaid 5 years, if no other persons suffering from disability raises a claim for transfer to his post, he need not be transferred from the present station. Though the appellant submitted representation prior to the general transfer of the year 2024 to the 4^th respondent Deputy Chief Engineer (General) through proper channel requesting to exclude him from the general transfer pointing out his physical disability and family circumstance, as per Ext. P2 draft list of transfer dated 25.06.2024 issued by the 4^th respondent the appellant was proposed to transfer to a distance of 70 kilometers away from his residence. Immediately thereafter the appellant filed Ext.P3 appeal dated 27.06.2024 before the 4^th respondent and then as per Ext.P4 order dated 01.10.2024 he was included in the final transfer list to a place situated at a distance of 75 kilometers from his place of residence. After the issuance of Ext.P4, the present Ext.P5 transfer order was issued by the 4^th respondent transferring him to PH Section, Kozhinjampara, which is 15 kilometers away from his residence. With his present disability, the appellant has to catch 3 buses to reach the transferred station and hence interference of this Court is highly necessary.

6. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents pointed out that after Ext.P6 order by the Government, the Union of differently abled persons approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.43815 of 2023 raising a grieva