High Court Kerala High Court

Prakasan.N.K. vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 3 January, 2007

Kerala High Court
Prakasan.N.K. vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 3 January, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 254 of 2007(E)


1. PRAKASAN.N.K., METER READER,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. RAJESH KRISHNAN.N.,
3. P.MOHAMMED SALIH,METER READER,
4. T.ABDUNNASIR,

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (H.R.M),

                For Petitioner  :DR.K.P.SATHEESAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.K.DENESAN

 Dated :03/01/2007

 O R D E R
                        K.K. DENESAN, J.



                = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

                  W.P.(C) No. 254 OF 2007 E

                = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =



               Dated this the 3rd January, 2007



                         J U D G M E N T

The petitioners belong to the category of Meter

Readers in the Kerala State Electricity Board. It is

contended that they possess the qualification of degree

in Electrical Engineering and are qualified to be

appointed as Assistant Engineers. It is pointed out in

Exts. P1 and P2 representations filed by the

petitioners 1 and 2 before the Chief Engineer that

vacancies in the post of Asst. Engineer are being

filled up by appointing temporary hands from outside

and under such circumstances the Board should consider

the claim of the petitioners for promotion to the post

of Asst. Engineer. Though the petitioners will have to

undergo the process of selection to get regular

appointment as Asst. Engineers, the respondents can

consider their case for appointment on temporary basis,

in case the posts are filled up temporarily by

candidates from outside. On the above ground the

petitioners 1 and 2 have filed Exts. P1 and P2.

2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the

WPC No. 254/2007 -2-

petitioners 3 and 4 also have filed similar

representations and those representations also may be

directed to be considered.

3. Legal Liaison Officer for the respondent-Board

submits that the request made by the petitioners will

be considered and appropriate decision will be taken.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of

directing the 2nd respondent to pass orders on Exts. P1

and P2 as also the representations said to have been

filed by the petitioners 3 and 4 as expeditiously as

possible. Time for compliance is six weeks on the

petitioners producing a copy of the judgment before the

2nd respondent.

K.K. DENESAN

JUDGE

jan/