IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 22404 of 2010(A)
1. K.G.MADHANAKRISHNAN, S/O.M.GOVINDAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESNTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, WATER
3. THE DIRECTOR, GROUND WATER DEPARTMENT
4. SRI.K.S.MADHU, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
For Petitioner :SRI.K.P.JUSTINE (KARIPAT)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :19/07/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
---------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 22404 OF 2010
--------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of July, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is an Executive Engineer in the Ground
Water Department since 1.3.2005. He is aspiring for promotion to
the post of Superintending Engineer. According to the petitioner, his
claims have been over looked by the respondents for the reason
that by Ext.P6, disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner
in relation to an allegation which took place in 1993. It is stated that
the proceedings were finalised by Ext.P13 proceedings dated
8.9.2009 directing to withhold one increment of the petitioner without
cumulative effect.
2. The contention of the petitioner is that the said
punishment cannot be relied upon to deny his promotion to the post
of Superintending Engineer. He has also relied on Exts.P16 to P18
judgments of this Court in support of this contention. It is also
complained that even though he filed Exts.P25 to 27
representations before respondents 1 and 3, his representations
have not evoked any response. Aggrieved by all these, this writ
petition has been filed.
WPC No.22404/2010
2
2. If as stated by the petitioner, the effect of Exts.P16 to P18
judgments rendered by this Court and the Supreme Court is that
pendency of proceedings as in this case could not have resulted in
depriving the petitioner of his promotion, his complaints have to be
considered.
Having regard to the pendency of representations filed by the
petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to
respondents 1 and 3 to consider the representations filed by the
petitioner and pass orders thereon. This shall be done as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of eight weeks
from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
The petitioner shall produce copies of this judgment along with
a copy of the writ petition before respondents 1 and 3 for compliance.
ANTONY DOMINIC
(JUDGE)
vps
WPC No.22404/2010
3
WPC No.22404/2010
4