Disposed

Dr.Prasannakumari v. State of Kerala and Another

Kerala HC12 Dec 2008WP(C)/36621/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a Senior Medical Officer seeking temporary promotion to Chief Medical Officer. The petitioner argued she was eligible by virtue of her seniority despite vacant posts. The court directed the Secretary to Government to consider temporary promotion subject to vacancies and rules, with a three-week timeline.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Secretary to Government to consider petitioner's claim for temporary promotion under Rule 31(a)(i) within three weeks.

Dr.Prasannakumari Vs State of Kerala and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2008 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 36621 of 2008(I) -----------------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S): -------------------------

¶7

DR.PRASANNAKUMARI, SENIOR MEDICAL OFFICER, GOVERNMENT AYURVEDA HOSPITAL, PALA.

¶8

BY ADV. SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF SMT.MOLLY JACOB SMT.U.M.FOUSIA SMT.M.KABANI DINESH SMT.BOBY M.SEKHAR SMT.M.P.SEETHA

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

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

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

2. DIRECTOR, INDIAN SYSTEM OF MEDICINES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.MANOJ KUMAR

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.

¶16

======================================

¶17

W.P.(C)No. 36621 of 2008

¶18

====================================== Dated this the 12^th day of December 2008

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner is presently working as Senior Medical Officer, Indian System of Medicine in the Government Ayurveda Hospital at Pala. She is due to retire from service on 31.3.2009 on attaining the age of superannuation. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that notwithstanding the existence of vacant posts of Chief Medical Officer, the respondents are not taking steps to promote her to the category of Chief Medical Officer. The petitioner submits that by virtue of her seniority, she is eligible to be promoted to the category of Chief Medical Officer and that claiming such promotion, she has submitted Ext.P3 representation dated 20.11.2008 before the Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner inter alia prays for a direction to the Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department to consider the request made by her in Ext.P3 and take a decision thereon within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

The post of Chief Medical Officer is a selection post. Therefore regular promotions can be effected only after the Departmental Promotion Committee is convened and eligible officers are selected. Ext.P2 discloses that the Government have effected temporary

¶22

W.P.(C)No.36621/2008 2

¶23

promotions under Rule 31(a)(i) of Part II of the KS&SSR to the category of Chief Medical Officer, Ayurveda pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C)No.25662 of 2008. Ext.P1 seniority list discloses that the petitioner is serial No.113 in the seniority list of Senior Medical Officer as on 1.1.2004. It is seen from Ext.P2 that Sl.No.95 in Ext.P1 seniority list has been temporarily promoted to the category of Chief Medical Officer. From Ext.P1 seniority list, it is also seen that Sl.Nos.110 to 105 and 110 to 112 have attained the age of superannuation. In these circumstances, I dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to the Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department to consider whether based on the petitioner’s seniority and subject to the availability of vacancies, she can be temporarily promoted to the category of Chief Medical Officer under Rule 31(a)(i) of Part II of the KS&SSR. Orders in that regard shall be passed within three weeks from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment. While considering the claim of the petitioner, the claims of persons senior to her shall also be considered.

¶24

P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE

¶25

css/

Dr.Prasannakumari v. State of Kerala and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.Prasannakumari v. State of Kerala and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Vijayakumar and Others Vs State of Kerala and Others

M.K.Jaffar and Others Vs State of Kerala and Another

Sankaran Namboothiri N.S. Vs Travancore Devaswom Board

K.v.Vasanthy Vs State of Kerala

Mohana Dasan.v Vs the Director of Panchayats

S.Sivanandan Vs State of Kerala & Others