Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner, a Constable/Driver, was recently posted to 230 Battalion in Group Centre, Pallipuram, Thiruvananthapuram, through Ext.P2 Movement Order, dated 5.9.2014. The petitioner is said to have joined duty on 16.09.2014. Very soon thereafter, the 3rd respondent issued Ext.P3 proceedings cancelling Ext.P2 transfer order. In the above circumstances, initially the petitioner filed Ext.P4 representation before the very 3rd respondent who issued Ext.P3 cancellation order. Pending Ext.P4 representation, the petitioner is also said to have filed Ext.P5 representation WPC No.25691/14
2
before the 4th respondent to reconsider Ext.P3 and allow him to continue in his present posting. Seeking a direction for the disposal of Exts.P4 and P5, the petitioner approached this Court.
3. Though both parties have made efforts to address at length the issue on merits, this Court, however, is not inclined to adjudicate the issue on merits. It will suffice if the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 4th respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation expeditiously.
In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the rival submissions of the respective counsel for the petitioner and the respondents, without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court disposes of the present writ petition with a direction to the 4th respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible.
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE
sj