C.S. Dias JUDGMENT
C.S. Dias, J.
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by her transfer from the Thrissur Regional Centre to Tirur Campus of the first respondent.
2. The case put forth by the petitioner, in brief, is that she is working as an Associate Professor (in the Thrissur Regional Centre) of the first respondent. She is also entrusted with the responsibility of the Director, as additional charge, at the Thrissur Campus since 31.7.2018. Before joining at Thrissur, she worked at Palakkad, Thiruvananthapuram and other Stations.
3. While discharging her duties as Director, she had to encounter various obstacles from members of the staff, which she had brought to the notice of the second respondent, as per Ext. P1. Although Ext. P1 was submitted as early as in December, 2019, no decision has been taken. Ignoring the rightful claim of the petitioner to continue as Director on a temporary basis, the charge of the Director was handed over to the third respondent. Even though a three-member committee was constituted to enquire into Ext. P1, no report has been submitted till date. During the tenure as Director, the petitioner conducted fact finding enquiries on complaints concerning Teachers, including the third respondent, who not only did not co-operate with the petitioner, but created obstacles and misbehaved with her. The petitioner is in charge of the conduct of examinations, which got delayed due to the Covid-19 pandemic and are in progress. The petitioner had brought to the notice of the Registrar of the first respondent, as per Ext. P3, the misconduct of the third respondent and other Teachers.
4. The petitioner has further averred that, she has information that at the instance of the third respondent and others, who influenced the second respondent, the petitioner is proposed to be shifted to some other place pretending it to be on a temporary basis, which is with a view to discharge the petitioner from the position of Director and give the post to the third respondent, who is the favorite of the second respondent. The third respondent has been posted as Director by Ext. P4.
5. By Ext. P5, the petitioner has been suddenly shifted to the Tirur Campus, purportedly on academic interest. As Ext. P5 is patently mala fide, the petitioner has again complained that her transfer cannot be supported by any law. The petitioner has a school-going son, who cannot be left alone at home. Her husband is at Thiruvananthapuram, looking after to his aged parents. The petitioner has mobility issues due to leg pain. Without considering the grievances of the petitioner, Ext. P7 order has been issued, transferring the petitioner on a temporary basis to the Tirur Campus and the existing incumbent in Tirur has been transferred to Ettumannur. The petitioner received the transfer order through Whatsapp, probably sent by another colleague.
6. On the above stated facts, the petitioner challenges Exts. P5 and P7, inter alia, on the grounds that the transfer is not supported by any administrative reasons and that the orders are utterly malafide and abuse of exercise of power violating the petitioner's fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 16, 21 and