High Court Kerala High Court

T.A Babu vs State Of Kerala on 28 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
T.A Babu vs State Of Kerala on 28 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35119 of 2008(E)


1. T.A BABU, LAST GRADE SERVANT,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. POULOSE JOSEPH, LAST GRADE SERVANT,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,

3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,

4. SACRED HEART COLLEGE, THEVARA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.JAYASANKAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :28/11/2008

 O R D E R
                   ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                  --------------------------
               W.P.(C) No.35119 OF 2008
             -------------------------------------
       Dated this the 28th day of November 2008

                      J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are last grade servants in the 4th

respondent College. It is stated that the 4th respondent had

terminated two last grade servants in 1992. Ultimately,

those employees have obtained favourable orders from the

University Appellate Tribunal, a copy of which is Ext.P1. In

pursuance to Ext.P1, those employees have also been

reinstated. Consequently, by Exts.P2 and P3 orders, the

respondents 1 and 2 have required the 4th respondent to

retrench two junior most last grade employees.

Unfortunately, as at present, the petitioners are the junior

most. It is by challenging Exts.P2 and P3, and praying for

continuance in the college, the writ petition is filed.

2. As already noticed, the proposal for retrenchment

as reflected by Exts.P2 & P3 arose out of the reinstatement

W.P.(C) No.35119/2008
-2-

consequent on Ext.P1. Since that order has become final,

the concerned employees had to be reinstated and as an

inevitable consequence, the junior most will have to be

retrenched. If so, I cannot find any fault with Exts.P2 & P3.

The writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg