IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 24599 of 2008(C)
1. DR.P.BALACHANDRAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :15/10/2008
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
======================================
W.P.(C)No. 24599 of 2008
======================================
Dated this the 15th day of October 2008
JUDGMENT
Heard. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned Government
Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is presently working as Deputy Director in
the Animal Husbandry Department. When he was superceded for
promotion to the post of Deputy Director for the year 2006, he
filed W.P.(C) No.27840 of 2006 in this Court. By Ext.P2 judgment
delivered on 12.1.2007, a learned Single Judge of this Court
directed the Departmental Promotion Committee to consider the
review petition submitted by the petitioner, holding that he was
entitled to be considered for promotion in the year 2006. Ext.P2
judgment has become final. The petitioner thereafter moved the
Secretary to Government, Animal Husbandry Department by
submitting Ext.P3 representation. In purported implementation of
the directions issued by this Court in Ext.P2 judgment, the
Departmental Promotion Committee considered the claim of the
petitioner and included him in the select list of officers eligible for
promotion as Deputy Director for the year 2007. Ext.P4 is the
select list approved and published by the State Government based
on the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion
Committee. The grievance voiced by the petitioner in this writ
W.P.(C)24599/2008 2
petition is that Ext.P4 select list to the extent it denies him
inclusion in the select list for the year 2006 is arbitrary and is not
in tune with the findings in Ext.P2 judgment.
3. When the writ petition came up for admission, this Court
had directed the learned Government Pleader to get instructions
and file a statement. The Joint Secretary to Government,
Agriculture Department has as directed by this Court filed a
statement dated 4.10.2008 which reads as follows:
The writ petition is filed seeking inclusion
of the petitioner’s name in the select list
for promotion as Deputy Director, Animal
Husbandry for the year 2006. It is
respectfully submitted that Government
have since taken a decision to refer the
case of the petitioner to the Departmental
Promotion Committee (Higher). The PSC
member who is the Chairman of the
Departmental Promotion Committee is
being moved for convening a meeting of
the ad-hoc Departmental Promotion
Committee to consider the request made
by the petitioner for inclusion of his name
in the select list of Deputy Director for the
year 2006. It is prayed that adequate time
may be granted for convening ad-hoc
Departmental Promotion committee and
taking a decision in the matter.”
4. It is seen from the above statement that the Departmental
Promotion Committee is reconsidering the claim of the petitioner for
inclusion in the select list of Deputy Directors for the year 2006. In this
state of affairs, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the
Secretary to Government, Animal Husbandry Department, who is the
W.P.(C)24599/2008 3
Convenor of the Departmental Promotion Committee to finalise the
proceedings referred to in the statement dated 4.10.2008 and
communicate its decision to the State Government within three months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The State
Government shall thereupon issue formal orders in the light of the
recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee. It is
clarified that if the petitioner is included in the select list for the year
2006, he will be entitled to all consequential benefits in terms of
provisions contained in Rule 28(b) of Part II, KS&SSR.
P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE
css/