High Court Kerala High Court

T.Mangalanandan vs State Of Kerala on 31 August, 2010

Kerala High Court
T.Mangalanandan vs State Of Kerala on 31 August, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 1451 of 2010()


1. T.MANGALANANDAN, FIELD ASSISTANT,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SIVAPRASAD U., FIELD ASSISTANT, HEALTH
3. GOPAKUMAR.N., INSECT COLLECTOR,

                        Vs



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

2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES,

                For Petitioner  :DR.K.P.SATHEESAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :31/08/2010

 O R D E R
                    C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
                        K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
               ------------------------------------------------------------
                         W.A.NO: 1451 OF 2010
                -----------------------------------------------------------
                Dated this the 31st August, 2010.

                                    JUDGMENT

Ramachandran Nair, J.

Appeal is filed against judgment of the learned Single Judge

dismissing the writ petition holding that appellants are not entitled

to be absorbed in the batch of Field Assistants taken for training

for promotion to Junior Health Inspectors. The appellants case is

that on an earlier occasion after commencement of training some

people were absorbed thereby extending the period of training in

that batch. Govt. Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted

that the training for the present batch commenced on 5/4/2010

and as of now nearly five months training is over out of the total

period of one year. The appellants case is only based on a

previous practice of taking people after commencement of training

for the batch. We feel this was an unhealthy practice which was

rightly discontinued. Therefore, an unhealthy precedent earlier

adopted by respondents does not justify the claim of the appellants

for being taken for training after an expiry of nearly half of the

period. We therefore find no merit in the writ appeal and it is

W.A.1451/2010 2

accordingly dismissed. However, we are of the view that after

absorbing all the trained persons if vacancies are likely to be there

then the respondents should arrange for commencement of the

training in the next batch without delay.

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Judge

K. SURENDRA MOHAN
Judge
jj

W.A.1451/2010 3