Court orders consideration of petitioner's family hardships regarding employment postings.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 17^th day of March, 2026 The petitioner states that he has been harassed for the last ten years due to the fact that he is not a member of any Officer’s Association having allegiance to any ruling party. The petitioner would allege that he is the only person transferred to Kanhangad in Kasaragod District from Trivandrum while effecting promotion. The petitioner challenged an earlier transfer order filing W.P.(C) No.28562/2022. This Court delivered Ext.P2 judgment directing to consider the petitioner’s grievance. Thereupon, the Board was pleased to cancel his transfer.

2. Now, the respondents have issued Ext.P4 posting order on working arrangement basis. The petitioner is posted from Substation Pothencode to TMR, Thirumala. The petitioner states that posting him in TMR is without obtaining any options. The posting in TMR would require the petitioner to travel frequently for installation of meters. The petitioner’s parents are aged 80 and 85 years. They have health problem and they have to visit hospital frequently. The presence of the petitioner at home is highly essential. His children are also minors, who cannot look after themselves. The petitioner, therefore, challenges Ext.P4 to the extent he is posted to TMR, Thirumala.

3. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel submitted that transfers and working arrangements are prerogative of the employer. The employees cannot choose the Stations where they want to work. Ext.P4 has been issued in exigencies of service. The writ petition is without any merit.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.

5. The petitioner would urge that the petitioner’s wife is a patient suffering from Type I respiratory failure, which results in frequent hospitalisation. The parents of the petitioner are aged 80 and 85 years. They also need constant medication and hospital visits. The petitioner’s children are minors, who are not able to take care of themselves. In such circumstances, if the petitioner is posted to TMR at Thirumala, the petitioner and his family would suffer serious hardship.

6. Be that as it may, I find that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P5 representation before the 2^nd respondent pointing out his grievances. In the facts pointed out by the petitioner, I am of the view that the 2^nd respondent should consider Ext.P5 representation, taking into account the family issues projected by the petitioner in a compassionate manner.

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P5 and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of one month.