Inter university transfers of teachers require written consent as per Section 68A of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act, and transfers made without consent are deemed illegal.

JUDGMENT :

N. NAGARESH, J.

The petitioner is before this Court aggrieved by Ext.P4 order transferring the petitioner from DB Pampa College, Parumala under the Mahatma Gandhi University to DB College, Sasthamcotta under the Kerala University.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor (Botany) at DB Pampa College, Parumala with effect from 09.11.2017, as per Ext.P1. The petitioner states that in order to accommodate the 9^th respondent, who is the juniormost in comparison to the petitioner, as Assistant Professor (Botany) at the DB Pampa College, Parumala, the petitioner has been transferred from DB Pampa College, Parumala to DB College, Sasthamcotta. Ext.P4 would show that the transfer is caused due to the illegal appointment of the 9^th respondent.

3. The petitioner states that approval was declined to the appointment of the 9^th respondent on the ground that there exists an additional permanent Teacher in the Department of Botany at DB College, Thalayolaparambu, whose workload is less than 16 hours. Due to lack of sufficient workload, the 8^th respondent requested a re-transfer to DB Pampa College, Parumala. But, the 9^th respondent was appointed in DB Pampa College, Parumala. Until the 9^th respondent's appointment receives approval, she cannot be transferred. Therefore, the 8^th respondent was transferred back to DB Pampa College, Parumala. Consequently, the petitioner has been imposed with a inter University transfer to DB College, Sasthamcotta.

4. The petitioner states that as per Section 68A of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act, inter university transfer shall be made only on the written request of the Teacher who has completed three years of service. In the petitioner's case, the transfer is ordered without obtaining consent of the petitioner. Ext.P4 order is necessitated due to the illegal appointment granted to the 9^th respondent. The transfer order is vitiated by malice. The transfer imposed undue hardship on the petitioner. Therefore, Ext.P4 order should be quashed, contends the petitioner.

5. The 6^th and 7^th respondents filed counter affidavit. Respondents 6 and 7 submitted that on 14.05.2018, the 8^th respondent requested for a transfer from DB Pampa College, Parumala to DB College, Thalayolaparambu. The 8^th respondent was transferred to Thalayolaparambu. Thereafter, the 9^th respondent was selected and appointed in DB Pampa College, Parumala. The Deputy Director of Collegiate Education refused to approve the appointment of the 9^th respondent on the ground that there is one excess permanent teaching staff at DB College, Thalayolaparambu.

6. In the meanwhile, the 8^th respondent sought for transfer from DB College, Thalayolaparambu to DB Pampa College, Parumala. As the 8^th respondent is senior to the petitioner, the 7^th respondent transferred the 8^th respondent to DB Pampa College, Parumala and the petitioner was transferred to DB College, Sasthamcotta.There is no illegality or irregularity in the order of transfer.

7. The 8^th respondent submitted that she is settled at Thripunithura and she had to shift her residence to Thripunithura to take care of her aged mother. The 8^th respondent was originally selected and appointed at DB Pampa College, Parumala with effect from 11.06.2015. At the request of the petitioner, she was given a transfer to DB College, Thalayolaparambu. However, on eventual revaluation after the introduction of new syllabus, the workload will go above 48 hours justifying the appointment of the petitioner at Thalayolaparambu. To protect the interest of the 9^th respondent, it was necessary that one Teacher in Botany working at DB College, Thalayolaparambu be transferred out. The 8^th respondent being the juniormost Teacher, offered her willingness for transfer to DB Pampa College, Parumala. Thereupon, Ext.P4 order was issued. The 8^th respondent joined DB Pampa College, Parumala on 17.03.2025 even before this writ petition was filed. The writ petition is without any merit.

8. Counsel for the petitioner reli