High Court Kerala High Court

Bency John vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 6 October, 2009

Kerala High Court
Bency John vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 6 October, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 11722 of 2009(I)


1. BENCY JOHN, SUB ENGINEER,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SATHEESH BABU, SUB ENGINEER,

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM),

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.GOPAKUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :06/10/2009

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                    ================
                 W.P.(C) NO. 11722 OF 2009 (I)
                =====================

            Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009

                          J U D G M E N T

Petitioners are diploma holders presently working as Sub

Engineers in the Kerala State Electricity Board. They are claiming

promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical).

Admittedly, going by Ext.P2, and as confirmed by the respondents

in the counter affidavit filed, the cadre strength of Assistant

Engineers is 2112. As per the Recruitment Rules, 30% of the posts

are to be filled up from among diploma holders working in the

category of Sub Engineers. Therefore 634 posts are to be filled

up from among the diploma holders to which category the

petitioners belong.

2. In the writ petition, the specific case of the petitioners

is that on 31/10/2007, only 561 posts were filled up by promoting

the diploma holders and that even among the 561 atleast 150

persons have retired till the date of filing the writ petition and

therefore the said vacancies were available to be filled up. It is

stated that they claimed promotion by making representations,

but promotions were not granted.

WPC 11722/09
:2 :

3. By order dated 23/5/2009, this Court directed the

respondents to promote the petitioners on a temporary basis

based on their rank and seniority, if vacancies of Assistant

Engineer (Electrical) earmarked to diploma quota were available.

It is stated that accordingly, as per Ext.P9, 75 diploma holders

were promoted. Producing Ext.P9, petitioners have filed IA

No.10808/09 complaining that the order has not been fully

complied with, in as much as according to the petitioners, from

among those who were promoted from the diploma quota, in view

of retirement and other reasons, only 370 persons were actually

working and therefore the entire vacancies in the diploma quota

should be filled up if the order dated 23/5/2009 were to be

complied with fully.

4. Respondents have filed a counter affidavit. In the

counter affidavit, the stand taken by the respondents is that the

claims made by the petitioners regarding the existence of

vacancies as averred in para 5 of the writ petition and para 4 and

5 of the affidavit in IA No.10808/09 are factually incorrect.

Respondents would contend that with the promotion that was

effected from the diploma quota as per Ext.P9, as against the 634

WPC 11722/09
:3 :

posts available to Diploma holders, 633 persons were working.

Therefore, they would submit that the order has been complied

with.

5. Although the counsel for the petitioners made

reference to Ext.P11 and contended that in the 40% direct

recruitment quota, posts were filled up as per Ext.P11 and that if

the same standard is adopted, more vacancies are available to

diploma holders. Thus the submissions made by the counsel for

the petitioners is that the exact number of vacancies available is

as contended in the writ petition, although this factual assertion is

contradicted by the standing counsel appearing for the

respondents.

6. Essentially what emerges for resolution is the exact

number of vacancies in the category of Assistant Engineer

(Electrical) that are available to be filled up from among the

diploma holders working as Sub Engineers. This certainly is a

factual issue which will have to be decided with reference to the

Recruitment Rules and the actual number of promotions made

and the number of persons who are now occupying the post of

Assistant Engineer (Electrical).

WPC 11722/09
:4 :

7. In my view, it will be more appropriate that the 2nd

respondent should examine the aforesaid claim of the petitioners

with reference to the materials available and take a decision in

the matter.

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 2nd

respondent to consider the claim of the petitioners regarding the

availability of more number of vacancies in the category of

Assistant Engineer (Electrical) to be filled up from among the

diploma holders working as Sub Engineers in the Board. It is

directed that the above process shall be completed as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of

production of a copy of this judgment and it is further directed

that if vacancies are found to be available, the same shall be filled

up by promoting eligible diploma holders working as Sub

Engineers.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp