IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 1428 of 2008()
1. S.PRASANTH, ARCHANA, MAYYANAD P.O.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY
3. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
For Petitioner :SRI.T.A.SHAJI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :18/07/2008
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ.
--------------------------------------
W.A.No.1428 OF 2008
-------------------------------------
Dated 18th July, 2008
JUDGMENT
Koshy,J.
While working as a Development Officer in the Life Insurance
Corporation of India, petitioner was advised by the Public Service
Commissioner to the post of Assistant Engineer/Assistant Town Planning
Officer Grade II in the Municipal Common service. As per the advice
memo dated 5.9.2003, posting orders were issued on 13.10.2003.
Petitioner requested for extension of joining time by 45 days. That
extension was granted. According to the petitioner, he was not able to
get relieving order from the LIC. and, therefore, he wanted further time.
He did not join within the 45 days granted. Then, Ext.P1 was issued
stating that unless he join duty within 45 days, appointment order will be
rejected. The above order was issued on 28.10.2003. Again on 9.1.2004
he was informed that unless he join duty within 10 days, he will not be
allowed to join duty. The statement that as identity particulars were not
received by him, he was not able to join duty also cannot be considered
as genuine. On 11.3.2004, he requested the Government for three
months’ time to join duty. That was declined on 12.4.2004. We are of
the opinion that petitioner was given sufficient time to join duty. If non-
W.A.1428/2008 2
joining vacancies are not reported before the expiry of the list, even
the NJD vacancies cannot be filled up and he cannot spoil the chance
of another person by waiting for pensionable service in the LIC. We
are of the opinion that learned Judge has considered the matter in its
proper perspective. Even though the statement in the impugned
judgment that the petitioner requested for two years’ time is not
correct, the undue delay in not joining duty beyond 45 and 10 days
allowed by the Government was properly justified.
The appeal is dismissed.
J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE
P.N.RAVINDRAN
JUDGE
tks