The petitioner and the third respondent are employees of a Corporate Educational Agency. The petitioner is presently working as Peon in B.E.M.Higher Secondary School, Parappanangady. The third respondent is presently working as a Peon in B.E.M.Higher Secondary School, Palakkad. It is stated that both of them have completed more than three years of service in their respective stations. The petitioner has averred that though he had requested the second respondent Corporate Manager to transfer and post him as Peon in B.E.M.Higher Secondary School, Palakkad, that request was not considered, when transfers were effected during the current academic year and also in the previous years. It is stated that aggrieved thereby the petitioner has filed Ext.P1 representation dated 1.6.2014 before the Director of Public Instruction. In this writ petition the petitioner inter alia seeks a direction to the Director of Public Instruction to consider Ext.P1 representation and pass appropriate orders thereon after affording him and respondents 2 and 3 an opportunity of being heard. 2. When the writ petition came up for hearing today, learned W.P.(C).No.15322 of 2014 2 counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted relying on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Padma Kumari Amma Vs. Valsala (2007 (3) KLT 129) that a teacher who seeks transfer in terms of rule 10 of Chapter XIV A of the KER and the relevant Government orders has an enforcible right, that the provisions thereof apply to non-teaching staff as well and therefore, the Director of Public Instruction has a duty to consider Ext.P1 representation by treating it as an appeal and pass appropriate orders thereon at the earliest. Learned counsel also submitted that the dispute being one in relation to a request for transfer, unless expeditious orders are passed, serious prejudice will be caused to the petitioner.
3. Sri.V.Vijulal, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the State of Kerala submitted that if as stated by the petitioner the original of Ext.P1 representation has been received by the Director of Public Instruction and it is pending, the Director of Public Instruction will examine the same and pass appropriate orders thereon at the earliest. Sri.P.V.Kunhikrishnan, learned standing counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that while disposing Ext.P1 representation, the petitioner, the second respondent and the third respondent may also be heard.
In the light of the aforesaid submissions, I dispose of the writ W.P.(C).No.15322 of 2014 3 petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P1 representation and pass appropriate orders thereon by treating it as one filed under rule 10 of Chapter XIV A of the KER, if the original thereof has been received and is pending, expeditiously and in any event within an outer limit of three months from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition complete in all aspects before him. The Director of Public Instruction shall, before disposing of Ext.P1 representation issue notice to the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 and afford them an opportunity of being heard. The Director of Public Instruction shall after orders are passed, communicate copies thereof to all the parties.
Sd/-
P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE.
rkc.