IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP.No. 11903 of 1999(P)
1. K.G.KUMAR
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SHARAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :07/10/2009
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
O.P.No. 11903 of 1999
==================
Dated this the 7th day of October, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has filed this original petition seeking the following
reliefs:
“(i) to call for the records leading to Ext.P5 and to quash the
same by the issue of writ of certiorari so far as it directs the promotion of
persons who are having lesser service in the category of Inspector of
Fisheries/Research Assistants etc. than that of the petitioner and so far as
it is against the ratio of 1:1 fixed by the special rules for appointment by
promotion and by transfer.
(ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ
direction or order directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for
promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Fisheries and to pass
appropriate orders according to the special Rules for Kerala Fisheries
Service and to grant him all consequential benefits.
(iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ
direction or order directing the respondents to provisionally promote the
petitioner to the post of Assistant Director of Fisheries.
(iv) to grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem
fit in the circumstances of the case.”
2. The contention of the petitioner is that as per Ext.P3
judgment of this Court, Inspectors having greater length of service
than the persons in the categories of 5 and 6 mentioned in the
recruitment rules are eligible to be considered for promotion ahead of
categories 5 and 6. Categories 5 and 6 are Superintendent of
Fishermen Training Centre, Marine Survey Officer, Fresh Water
Biologist, Research Officer etc. The contention of the petitioner is that
respondents 3 and 4 and others who were working as Research
O.P.11903/99 2
Assistant/Research Officer had lesser service in the feeder category
than the petitioner when they were considered for promotion and
promoted. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is senior to
respondents 3 and 4 and others and, therefore, the petitioner should
have been considered for promotion ahead of them.
3. The petitioner retired from service on 31.5.1999. At the
time of filing this original petition itself the 3rd respondent had been
holding the post of Deputy Director of Fisheries admittedly. The
petitioner has not stated as to when exactly the 4th respondent was
promoted as Assistant Director. Although the petitioner had sought to
implead respondents 3 and 4 in a representative capacity,
C.M.P.No.10312/2000 was filed only to permit the petitioner to give
public notice to the institution of the original petition by public
advertisement. As such, as per the records, respondents 3 and 4 have
not been impleaded in a representative capacity, as a consequence of
which, I cannot consider the claim of the petitioner as against others
who are not parties to this original petition. Further, the petitioner is
challenging a the select list which was published on 24.8.1998, only on
18.5.1999. As per sub rule 8(a) of Rule 28(b)(i) of the KS&SSR, a
person aggrieved by a select list has to file a representation within one
month from the date of publication of the list. The petitioner did not do
the same.
O.P.11903/99 3
4. For all the above reasons, I am not inclined to exercise my
discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, this original petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
O.P.No. 11903 of 1999-P
==================
J U D G M E N T
7th October, 2009