IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 35926 of 2009(I)
1. NAZARUDDIN.A, EDAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA ELECTRICITY
3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,
4. THE CHIEF VIGILANCE & SECURITY OFFICER,
5. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
For Petitioner :SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)
For Respondent :SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :04/06/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
-------------------------
W.P.(C.) No.35926 of 2009 (I)
---------------------------------
Dated, this the 4th day of June, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a Sub Engineer in the Kerala State Electricity
Board, aspiring promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer. Ext.P8
is the list of eligible Sub Engineers prepared for effecting temporary
promotions to the post of Assistant Engineers. In Ext.P8, the
petitioner’s name has been included at Serial No.31. Although
several persons, who are included in Ext.P8 list, were temporarily
promoted as per Rule 31 of the KS & SSR, the petitioner’s name was
not considered for the reason that disciplinary proceedings were
pending against him.
2. Ext.P2 is the order placing the petitioner under
suspension. However, the petitioner submitted that by Ext.P7 order
he was reinstated. On reinstatement, the petitioner contended that,
his ineligibility, which justified his exclusion from temporary
promotion, ceased to exist and therefore he should be given the
benefit of temporary promotion. It is with this grievance, this writ
petition has been filed.
WP(C) No.35926/2009
-2-
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on
Exts.P14, P15 & P16 judgments of this Court, where, according to
him, identical claims raised by employees of the KSEB itself have
been considered by this Court and the contentions were upheld.
4. However, learned standing counsel for the Board
contended that mere inclusion in the select list does not confer any
right on a person for promotion. He also relied on the Apex Court
judgment in C.O.Arumugam and Others v. State of Tamil Nadu and
Others(1999 Supp (2) SCC 199) to contend for the position that the
appointing authority can justifiably exclude a person from
promotion so long as disciplinary proceedings are pending against
him. It is contended that charge sheet has been issued to the
petitioner and so long as proceedings are pending against him, he
cannot demand that he should be promoted either permanently or
temporarily.
5. As already stated, promotions, which are effected from
Ext.P8 list are temporary and in terms of Rule 31 of the KS & SSR.
Once a select list is prepared, except those who are under
suspension, rest of the persons included in the list are normally
WP(C) No.35926/2009
-3-
eligible for temporary promotion. It has been so held by this Court
in the judgments relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
As far as the petitioner is concerned, with Ext.P7 order reinstating
the petitioner, the ineligibility due to suspension has ceased to
exist. No other justifiable reason is stated to exclude the petitioner.
If that be so, the petitioner is entitled to claim the benefit of
temporary promotion, by virtue of his inclusion in Ext.P8 list. True,
in the Apex Court judgment relied on by the learned Standing
Counsel for the Board, it has been held that so long as disciplinary
proceedings are pending, the appointing authority is entitled to
exclude the person from promotion.
6. However, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, his
entitlement will depend to Rule 31. Rule 31 only excludes, those
who are under suspension and those excluded for justifiable
reasons. In my view, his case is covered by Exts.P14, P15 & P16
judgments and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the
judgment relied on by the learned Standing Counsel for the Board
are not of any relevance in this case.
In view of the above, I dispose of the writ petition directing the
WP(C) No.35926/2009
-4-
respondents to effect temporary promotion to the petitioner on the
basis of his inclusion in Ext.P8 select list to the post of Assistant
Engineer. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any
rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg