Narayanankutty.D vs Director Of Panchayaths Office Of … on 26 August, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 24639 of 2009(Y)


1. NARAYANANKUTTY.D,JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ANILKUMAR NOCHIYIL,JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT

                        Vs



1. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS OFFICE OF THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF

3. SURESH.S,JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.V.AMARESAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :26/08/2009

 O R D E R
                             P.N.RAVINDRAN
                 ------------------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C) No. 24639 of 2009-Y
                 ------------------------------------------------
                Dated this the 26th day of August, 2009

                                JUDGMENT

Heard Sri.M.V.Amaresan, the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned senior

Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents. In the

nature of the order that I propose to pass, I do not deem it necessary

to issue notice to or hear the third respondent.

2. The petitioners, who are presently working as Junior

Superintendents in various Grama Panchayats have filed this writ

petition challenging the seniority list appended to Ext.P4

proceedings. They have also sought incidental reliefs. Ext.P4 is the

final seniority list of Secretaries of Grama Panchayats. The

objections filed by the petitioners were also considered before the

seniority list appended to Ext.P4 was finalised. Under Rule 27B of

Part II of the KS&SSR, an appeal lies to the Government from Ext.P4

seniority list. The period of limitation prescribed for filing such an

appeal is six months from the date on which the seniority list is

W.P.(C) No.24639/2009-Y

– 2 –

finalised. Ext.P4 seniority list was finalised on 10-8-2009. The

period of limitation for filing an appeal has not expired. Since the

petitioners have an effective and meaningful alternative remedy, I am

of the opinion that they should invoke the said remedy, instead of

seeking the intervention of this Court.

I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with the direction that

in the event of the petitioners filing appeals before the Government

invoking the power of the Government under Rule 27B of Part II of

the KS&SSR, the Government shall consider the same and pass

orders thereon expeditiously along with other appeals, if any filed

therefrom. The directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C) No.23443

of 2009 shall govern this case also.

Sd/-

P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE.

dkr

/ TRUE COPY /

PA TO JUDGE.