IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 18277 of 2007(A)
1. RATNAKARAN C.K.,
... Petitioner
2. K. GANGADHARAN, S/O.GOVINDAN NAMBIAR,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
3. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER,
4. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
For Petitioner :SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
Dated :14/06/2007
O R D E R
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.18277 of 2007-A
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of June, 2007.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners are Excise Guards, presently working in Kannur
District. They were initially appointed in Kasargode Division which is
in the erstwhile Kannur District, on the advice of the PSC. Later, the
Ist petitioner was transferred to Kannur Division in 1999 and the
second petitioner was transferred to Kannur Division in 2000. Both
the petitioners got inter-unit transfer to Kannur isubject to the
condition that their seniority will be lost and they will be joining the
Kannur Division as the junior most. Ever since the said order, the
petitioners are continuing in Kannur District. While so, the Assistant
Excise Commissioner published the seniority list of Excise Guards from
1-1-89 to 1-9-94 by proceedings dated 6-11-2000. The petitioners
were not included in that list apparently for the reason that they joined
Kannur only in 1999 and 2000. Later, when the seniority list of Excise
Guards on 24-7-2003 was published they were included with Rank
Numbers 15 and 16 respectively. The petitioners are aggrieved by the
assignments of such seniority to them. Claiming seniority from the
date of advice, they have filed Exts.P8 and P9 representations before
WPC No. 18277 of 2007
2
the Excise Commissioner. In support of their claim they cited the
precedent of one Mr. K.P.Hashim whose case is dealt with under Ext.P6
and P7 proceedings. They pray the second respondent may be
directed to consider and pass orders on their representations
mentioned above.
2. The petitioners got inter-unit transfer, on their request
subject to the condition that they will loose their seniority though they
joined in the Kannur unit in 1999 and 2000. Therefore, they have no
legal right to claim seniority with effect from their date of advice. It is
not clear from the pleadings in this writ petition what are the facts of
Mr. K.P.Hashim. Even assuming that he is granted seniority wrongly,
the same cannot be cited as a precedent, to press the Government to
repeat the illegality. Going by the facts pleaded in their
representations, the petitioners do not have any case on merit.
Therefore, no purpose will be served by directing the second
respondent to consider Exts.P8 and P9 representations. It will be a
sheer waste of time to the second respondent and the petitioners.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition fails, and it is dismissed.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
JUDGE.
MS