High Court Kerala High Court

Salim Babu.Pk. vs The Union Of India Represented By … on 9 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
Salim Babu.Pk. vs The Union Of India Represented By … on 9 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 1183 of 2008()


1. SALIM BABU.PK., AGED 39 YEARS, SUB
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR,

3. SRI.K.S.SRINIVASAN, CHIEF GENERAL

4. SRI.HARIDASAN.M, GENERAL MANAGER,

5. SRI.V.J.D.NAIR, DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER,

6. SRI.K.G.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, ASSISTANT

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :09/06/2008

 O R D E R
                J.B.Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ.
               =====================
                     W.A.No.1183 of 2008
               =====================

            Dated this the 9th day of June, 2008.

                           JUDGMENT

Koshy,J.

Some adverse remarks were entered against the petitioner

in his confidential records that were communicated to him. He

filed a representation. The representation was not considered.

That was again challenged in appeal and finally the

representation given to the Chief General Manager was also

rejected. Against that order he approached this Court and this

Court directed to consider his request. Again that was considered

and the same was rejected by the Chief General Manager. The

learned single Judge found that all aspects were considered by

the superior officers and all the pleadings made by him were

considered after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner.

2. In view of the above, no interference is called for under

Article 226 of the Constitution as this Court is not sitting in

-: 2 :-

appeal over these matters. There is no jurisdictional error or

patent illegality. We see no ground to differ from the view

expressed by the learned single Judge.

The Writ Appeal is dismissed.

J.B.Koshy,
Judge.

P.N.Ravindran,
Judge.

ess 10/6