IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 25249 of 2007(E)
1. K.S.JAYIN, S/O.K.C.SKARIA, AGE 44 YEARS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER
3. SRI.C.A.PADMANABHAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.P.JNANASEKHARAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :17/09/2007
O R D E R
V. GIRI , J
==========================
W.P.(C) NO. 25249 OF 2007
==========================
Dated this the 17th day of September, 2007.
JUDGMENT
The essential grievance of the petitioner is in relation to
Ext.P4 provisional seniority list of Engineering Graduates(Civil) in
the Kerala State Electricity Board appointed against the quota of
10% reserved for in-service Engineering Graduates. According to
the learned counsel for the petitioner, Ext.P4 seniority list was
considered by this Court in O.P Nos. 15051/2000 and
3262/2001 vide Exts.P5 and P7. He further contends that this
Court had declared the principle that in respect of persons who
have been directly recruited to the post of Assistant Engineer
against the 10% quota available to the engineering graduates,
who are already in service, their date of first effective advise has
to be treated as the basis for fixing the seniority of the direct
recruits, in terms of Rule 27(c) of KS & SSR Part I.
2. Ext.P4 as such has not been set aside by this Court.
Directions have been given in favour of the petitioners in the said
W.P.(C) NO. 25249/2007 : 2 :
two writ petitions. In my opinion, it is essential that the
Electricity Board finalises Ext.P4 list within a time frame and in
doing so the board is bound to look into objections preferred by
the petitioner and other aggrieved persons and also take note of
Exts.P5 and P7 judgments and the law declared therein.
Learned Standing Counsel for Electricity Board submits that
Ext.P4 will be finalised in accordance with law, taking note of the
observations contained in Exts.P5 and P7 as also the objections
preferred by the aggrieved persons including that of the
petitioner within a maximum period of six months from today.
This submission is recorded.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that taking
note of the directions contained in Exts.P5 and P7 judgments,
certain similarly situated persons have been promoted by the
Board as Assistant Executive Engineers with reference to the date
of first effective advise. He prays that the petitioner be
considered for provisional promotion in the meanwhile.
4. In the circumstances, the Chief Engineer, 2nd
respondent, may look into Ext.P6 and take appropriate decision
W.P.(C) NO. 25249/2007 : 3 :
with regard to the claim of the petitioner within a period of six
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. He
shall keep in mind the directions contained in Exts.P5 and P7
judgment. If the claim of the petitioner is found sustainable,
then he may be given provisional promotion pending finalisation
of Ext.P4 seniority list. Obviously all such promotions are to be
reviewed and regularised after finalisation of Ext.P4 seniority list.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
V. GIRI, JUDGE.
rv
W.P.(C) NO. 25249/2007 : 4 :