High Court Kerala High Court

Jayaprakash.S vs State Of Kerala on 20 February, 2009

Kerala High Court
Jayaprakash.S vs State Of Kerala on 20 February, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 5664 of 2009(C)


1. JAYAPRAKASH.S, AGED 42 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC OFFICE

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.TOM JOSE (PADINJAREKARA)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :20/02/2009

 O R D E R
                 T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J
               --------------------------------------------------
                 W.P.(C) No. 5664 of 2009
               ---------------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 20th day of February, 2009

                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner is working as a U.D.Clerk in the Land

Acquisition (Genl), Office of the Special Tahsildar,

Pathanamthitta. The petitioner has filed this writ petition

seeking for a direction to the first respondent to dispose of

Exts.P4 and P5 representations. The petitioner entered service

pursuant to the advice memo issued by the Public Service

Commission dated 4.9.1993 and he joined service as L.D.Clerk

on 1.10.1993. The petitioner had successfully completed his

probation on 19.1.1997. He has passed the Chain Surveyor test

on 6.4.1987, DOM test on 18.1.1997. He has also passed

Accounts Test (Lower), Revenue Test(Travancore) Part-I and the

Village Officer Manual Test in December 2001. Subsequently,

he passed Parts II and III of Revenue Test (Travancore). The

petitioner was promoted as U.D.Clerk on 30.11.2004. The

grievance raised by the petitioner is that he has not been

granted promotion after reckoning his seniority, and the date of

effective advice. According to him many of his juniors have

gained promotion ahead of him.

wpc:5664 of 2009
2

2. The petitioner has filed Exts.P4 and P5 representations.

It is up to the second respondent to take a decision on them.

Hence at this stage this Court is not expressing any view on his

claims. The second respondent is directed to consider and pass

orders on Ext.P4 and P5 representations in accordance with law

after hearing the petitioner within a period of two months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If any other

person is affected by the consideration of his claim, those

persons will also be heard in the matter.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE

bps