Allowed

Franad Musadeekh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Jun 2008WP(C)/17529/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a senior Principal seeking provisional promotion to Director of Technical Education, filed a writ petition. The Court directed the Government to dispose of the pending representation within one month and heard the petitioner before disposal.

What did the court decide?

Direction to dispose of Ext.P4 representation within one month and hear the petitioner before disposal.

Franad Musadeekh Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2008 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 17529 of 2008(J)

¶6

--------------------------

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

¶9

FRAHAD MUSADEEKH, S/O.USMAN JONES SAIT, 54 YEARS, WORKING AS PRINCIPAL,GOVERNMENT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING,KANNUR,RESIDING AT FLAT NO.EF-7/261, P.T.CHACKO NAGAR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 011.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR

SRI.LEO GEORGE

RESPONDENTS:

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIOGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

BY G.P. SHRI A.J.VARGHESE

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

K.T. SANKARAN,J.

¶19

-------------------------------------W.P.(C) No.17529 of 2008 J -------------------------------------Dated this the 20^th day of June, 2008.

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

The petitioner is working as the Principal of the Government College of Engineering, Kannur. According to the petitioner, he is the senior most Principal/Joint Director (Engineering College Stream) in the Department of Technical Education. It is stated that the petitioner will attain the age of superannuation on 23.9.2008. The vacancy of Director of Technical Education arose on 31.3.2008. The post of Director of Technical Education is to be filled up by open selection from among the Principal/Joint Director (Engineering College Stream) on the basis of merit, as per the qualifications and experience prescribed by the Rules. According to the petitioner, he is fully qualified to be considered for the post of Director as per the Special Rules. He states that he being the senior most among the qualified persons, he is entitled to be appointed as the Director. The petitioner also states that even in 2004, the Government conducted a selection to the post of Director of Technical Education. The petitioner was also invited for the interview by the Selection Committee. It is stated that all the persons who participated in the interview in

¶22

WP(C) No.17529/2008

¶23

¶24

the year 2004 have since then retired from service. The petitioner also relies on Ext.P2 circular dated 3.6.1999 issued by the Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Rules) Department which provides as follows:-

¶25

“In the circumstances, it has been decided that very hard and genuine cases of promotions where the incumbents are to retire within a period of six months and where there is not a large number of seniors to be promoted, promotions may be given in relaxation of the ban on provisional promotion. The concerned Administrative Department will examine each such case on merits and circulate the file to Chief Minister for orders.”

¶26

Pointing out these facts the petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 representation dated 29.5.2008 before the Government praying that appropriate orders be issued to fill up the vacancy of the Director of Technical Education which arose on 31.3.2008 expeditiously so that the petitioner also could be considered for the appointment of said post. There is also a prayer in Ext.P4 representation to promote the petitioner provisionally as Director of Technical Education. Ext.P4 is pending disposal before the Government.

¶27

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the Government shall consider Ext.P4 representation as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt

¶28

WP(C) No.17529/2008

¶29

¶30

of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner shall also be heard before disposing of Ext.P4 representation. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition as well along with the copy of the judgment.

¶31

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

¶32

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE.

¶33

cks

Franad Musadeekh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Franad Musadeekh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muslim Educational & Cultural Form Vs State of Kerala Rep. by Chief Secretary

Udayan.Y.S Vs the Principal.Govt.Dental College &Ors

Ajitha.K.T.K. Vs State of Kerala & Others

Shani Udayan Vs State of Kerala and Others

Muhammed Shereef.P. Vs Dist.Educational Officer,Thamassery

Prahad Musadeekh Vs State of Kerala and Others