M.P.Sajan vs State Of Kerala on 15 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
M.P.Sajan vs State Of Kerala on 15 June, 2010




WP(C).No. 23625 of 2009(W)

                      ...  Petitioner


                       ...       Respondent



                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :15/06/2010

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                 W.P.(C) NO. 23625 OF 2009 (W)

              Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010

                          J U D G M E N T

The issue raised in the writ petition is regarding the

correctness of the claim of the petitioner for inclusion in the select

list for the post of Commercial Tax Officer for the year 2002 at the

appropriate place, according to his seniority.

2. Petitioner was working as a Sales Tax Inspector and

was eligible for inclusion in the select list for the post of

Commercial Tax Officer for the year 2002. The DPC which met on

25/5/2002, considered his case and proposed to supersede him.

Accordingly, Ext.P1 memo was issued to him, which was replied

by Ext.P2. Ext.P3 is the select list for the year 2002 and the

petitioner was superseded and according to the petitioner, he

ought to have been included between Sl.Nos.18 and 19.

3. He represented against Ext.P3 in terms of Rule 28(b)(i)

(8) of the KS&SSR. Accordingly, his case was considered by the

DPC (Lower) held on 9/8/02 and Ext.P5 is the select list, wherein

the petitioner was also selected for promotion to the cadre of

Sales Tax Officers for the year 2002. Based on his inclusion in

WPC No. 23625/09
:2 :

Ext.P5 select list, he was promoted by Ext.P6 order. However,

when seniority list was published by Exts.P7 and P7(a), petitioner

was assigned Sl.No.689 and his junior was assigned Sl.No.641.

4. Petitioner objected to the seniority assigned by filing

Ext.P8 and also submitted Ext.P9 representation to the Convenor

of DPC. However, Ext.P10(a) final seniority list was published

without accepting his objections. He represented the matter by

submitting Ext.P11. That was considered and his claim was

rejected by Ext.P13. Further representations were also made, and

by Ext.P15, he was asked to make a representation to the DPC.

Accordingly, he made a representation to the DPC and was

informed by Ext.P17 that the decision of the DPC (Lower) held on

9/8/02 was to include him in the select list for the year 2002 only

with prospective effect, and therefore, his claim for appropriate

placement in Ext.P3 select list cannot be accepted. It is the

correctness of this stand that calls for determination in this writ


5. Petitioner’s case is that in the DPC held on 25/5/2002,

his claim was superseded on the ground that his confidential

reports were relatively poor and the DPC wanted further materials

WPC No. 23625/09
:3 :

to be obtained from his superiors. It is stated that, accordingly,

materials were obtained, and on that basis, suitability was

reassessed, and he was included in Ext.P5 select list. It is stated

that once his suitability for promotion was accepted, he is entitled

to be included in Ext.P3 select list according to his seniority in the

feeder category. It is this contention that is rejected by the

impugned order.

6. However, learned Government Pleader on the other

hand contends that Ext.P5 is only a supplementary select list, and

therefore, the petitioner has no right to claim inclusion or ranking

in Ext.P3 select list.

7. Admittedly, when the DPC met on 25/5/2002 and

prepared Ext.P3 select list, petitioner was a candidate eligible for

consideration. His case was considered and was superseded and

further materials were collected by the DPC. It was accordingly

that his case was again considered on 9/8/2002. Ext.P5 is the

select list that was published pursuant to the DPC held on 9/8/02.

Both Exts.P3 and P5 show that select lists were for the year 2002.

Neither Ext.P5 nor the counter affidavit in this writ petition

indicate that Ext.P5 was a supplementary select list as contended

WPC No. 23625/09
:4 :

before me. If on assessment of the petitioner’s suitability, the

DPC held on 9/8/02 has held him eligible for promotion, his

eligibility is therefore recognised with reference to Ext.P3 select

list. In this case, there is no indication in Ext.P5 to the effect that

the select list was a supplementary one and in such a situation, a

satiation, in terms of Rule 28(b)(7) KS&SSR, petitioner is entitled

to have his place in Ext.P3 select list depending upon his seniority

in the feeder category.

8. In the nature of the facts as stated above, I am

satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to succeed. He is entitled

to have his name included at the appropriate place in Ext.P3

select list, which according to the petitioner ought to have been

between Sl.Nos.18 and 19 of Ext.P3.

Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition holding that the

petitioner’s name ought to have been included at the appropriate

place in Ext.P3 select list for the year 2002 depending upon his

seniority and the 2nd respondent is directed to revise Ext.P3 select

list incorporating the name of the petitioner at the appropriate

place and revise his seniority on that basis. Needless to say that

the petitioner’s further entitlements will also be worked out on

WPC No. 23625/09
:5 :

that basis. Consequential orders will be passed as expeditiously

as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of

this judgment.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information