JUDGMENT

Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2022 The petitioner is working as Overseer in KSEB Ltd, attached to the Electrical Section, Moothakunnam in North Paravur. Prior to his posting at North Parvur, the petitioner had worked at the Marayoor Electrical Section, Adimaly. During the general transfer of 2021, the petitioner requested for transfer to the Marayoor Electrical Section since, as per the transfer guidelines, a workman will not be allowed to continue in a station for more than three years, if there are valid requests from other employees. The petitioner's request for transfer to Marayoor was not considered favourably. Instead, the petitioner was transferred to Parad Electrical Section in Thalassery geographical area under Ext.P2 general transfer order dated 04.09.2020.

Even though the petitioner submitted a grievance complaint against the transfer pointing out an open vacancy at Marayoor, the complaint did not evoke a positive response. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed W.P.(C)No.22293 of 2020. The writ petition was disposed vide Ext.P4 judgment, directing the competent authority of the KSEBL to take up the appeal filed by the petitioner and to pass appropriate order after affording an opportunity of hearing. Accordingly, the petitioner's appeal was considered and rejected under Ext.P5 order. Hence, the petitioner was compelled to approach this Court again by filing W.P.(C) No.17 of 2021. That writ petition was allowed by Ext.P7 judgment, finding the reasons stated in Ext.P5 for considering the petitioner's request for transfer to Marayoor to be beyond the scope of the transfer guidelines. Consequently, the respondents were directed to consider the petitioner's application for transfer during the general transfer of 2021-22, with specific reference to Clause 9 of the transfer guidelines, which provides an option for seeking transfer to remote/hilly areas subject to availability of vacancy.

2. To the petitioner's dismay, in the general transfer of 2021-22 also, he was transferred to Parad Electrical Section, Thalassery. Immediately, the petitioner submitted Ext.P9 representation, pointing out that the transfer has been effected without adverting to the direction in Ext.P7 judgment. Pending the representation, the petitioner was served with Ext.P10 memo relieving him from Muthakunnam Electrical Section and directing to report before the Assistant Engineer, Parad forthwith. Hence, this writ petition.

2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner contended that Ext.P8, to the extent it transfers the petitioner to Parad Electrical Section, without considering his appeal in accordance with the direction in Ext.P7 judgment, is ex facie illegal. The specific case of the petitioner is that, Overseers from other stations with more than 20 years of service are allowed to continue, resulting in denial of appointments to the petitioner. It is pointed out that 36 Overseers transferred to Parad along with the petitioner were subsequently re-transferred, while the petitioner is being compelled to join at Parad. It is contended that the petitioner's domicile station is Kodungalloor and his transfer on the premise that the domicile station is Moothakunnam, tainted with mala fides.

3. Learned Standing Counsel for the KSEBL contended that the petitioner was attached to his domicile electrical section Moothakunnam (North Paravur) from 17.08.2014 onwards. He was promoted from Lineman I to the cadre of Overseer on 20.08.2020 and retained at Electrical Section, Moothakunnam as a temporary measure. Subsequently, he was included in the online general transfer process and posted at Electrical Section, Parad as per the general transfer guidelines. The said transfer was challenged by the petitioner resulting in Ext.P4 judgment. In the general transfer 2021, the petitioner opted for posting at Electrical Section, Marayoor and exercised 4 inter-station choices in Thrissur District within Kodungalloor geographical area and 5 intra-station requests und