High Court Kerala High Court

R.Sasidharan Pillai vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 6 August, 2010

Kerala High Court
R.Sasidharan Pillai vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 6 August, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 6661 of 2010(G)


1. R.SASIDHARAN PILLAI, S/O.RAGHAVAN PILLAI
                      ...  Petitioner
2. M.VENUGOPALAN NAIR, S/O.MADHAVAN PILLAI,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION AND

3. THE SUPERINTENDENTING ENGINEER,

4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

5. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.MOHANLAL

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :06/08/2010

 O R D E R
                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
               --------------------------------------------------
                   W.P.(C) NO.6661 OF 2010(G)
               --------------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 6th day of August, 2010

                            J U D G M E N T

Petitioners’ grievance is regarding exclusion of their names

from Ext.P4 seniority list. According to the petitioners, they are CLR

workers working in the Kallada Irrigation Project. When a seniority

list was proposed to be prepared and finalized they submitted

Ext.P2 and P2(a) representations seeking their inclusion in the

seniority list. However, their names were not included and it is

complained that their juniors were included. It is with this grievance

this writ petition is filed.

2. Learned Government Pleader obtained instructions in the

matter and submits that it was for the reason that the petitioners

did not submit required details that they were not included in Ext.P4

seniority list. it is stated that subsequently details were obtained

and it is proposed to include their names in the revised seniority

list.

3. Now that a decision in favour of the petitioners to include

them in the revised seniority list has been taken by the respondents,

WPC.No.6661 /2010
:2 :

all that is necessary is that the respondents should implement the

said decision and include the name of the petitioners in the

seniority list to be revised. With that direction the writ petition is

disposed of .

Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the 2nd

respondent for taking appropriate action.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/