G.S.Suresh Kumar vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 25 March, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 1870 of 2009()


1. G.S.SURESH KUMAR, S/O.K.GANGADHARAN NAIR
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PRINTING,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :25/03/2010

 O R D E R
         K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ.
                ----------------------------------------
                       W.A.No.1870 of 2009
                ----------------------------------------
                      Dated 25th March, 2010

                             JUDGMENT

Balakrishnan Nair, J.

The appellant is the writ petitioner. He is presently

working as Off-set Operator Grade-I in Government Press,

Mannanthala, Thiruvananthapuram. He claims promotion to the post

of Senior Grade Off-set Operator in the vacancy which arose on

1.6.2008.

2. The post of Senior Grade Off-set Operator was created

by Ext.P1. Since the Special Rules did not cover that post, promotions

were being ordered according to seniority from among persons

working in the immediate lower post of Off-set Operator Grade I,

which is evident from Exts.P2 and P3. The appellant is the senior most

Off-set Operator Grade I as on 1.6.2008. He claimed promotion to the

vacancy of Senior Grade Off-set Operator which arose on 1.6.2008 by

submitting Ext.P5 representation. It was followed by Ext.P6

representation before the Government. As per the directions of this

Court, the Government considered Ext.P6 and rejected it by Ext.P10

communication dated 5.5.2009 on the ground that in view of the

W.A.No.1870/2009 2

directions in Ext.P12 judgment dated 6.1.2009 he cannot be promoted.

Challenging that order, the Writ Petition was filed. But, the learned

Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition in- limine. Hence, this Writ

Appeal.

3. We heard Sri.V.A.Muhammed, learned counsel for the

appellant and Smt.R.Bindhu, learned Government Pleader for the

official respondents. We notice that the post held by the appellant is

the immediate lower post in the direct line and he is the senior most in

that category. So, he is normally entitled to get promotion as Senior

Grade Off-set Operator. Persons up to his immediate senior were

promoted as and when vacancies arose. Therefore, there was no

reason for not promoting him. Further, the vacancy arose on

1.6.2008. By that time, Ext.P12 judgment was not rendered. So, the

said judgment cannot be pressed into service to deny the claim of the

appellant. Apart from that, Ext.P12 only says, till Special Rules are

finalised, promotions shall be made according to draft Special Rules.

Even going by the draft Special Rules, Off-set Operator Grade I is

included in the feeder category for promotion to the post of Senior

Grade Off-set Operator.

W.A.No.1870/2009 3

In view of the above position, the Writ Appeal is allowed.

Ext.P10 is quashed. The second respondent is directed to promote the

appellant provisionally, to the post of Senior Grade Off-set Operator

provided, he is otherwise qualified and no supervening disqualification

has come into existence like disciplinary action, in the meantime.

Since the appellant is retiring on 31.3.2010, the second respondent

shall take expeditious steps to promote the appellant on receipt of a

copy of this judgment. If found eligible, he shall be given promotion

with retrospective effect from 1.6.2008, with all consequential benefits

permissible as per law.

K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
Judge

P.N.RAVINDRAN
Judge

TKS