Dismissed

Harimohan.M.K. v. Divisional Commercial Manager & Another

Kerala HC23 Jan 2009WA/1026/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ appeal concerning railway employment, the High Court upheld the single judge's decision that the selection of the second respondent as a halting agent by lot complied with circular guidelines after the appellant's tenure expired. The court disposed of the appeal, and the appellant was directed to approach the railway manager for transfer of tickets and furniture.

What did the court decide?

The second respondent was confirmed as halting agent; appellant directed to seek transfer of articles from the first respondent.

Harimohan.M.K. Vs Divisional Commercial… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930

¶6

WA.No. 1026 of 2007()

¶7

--------------------{IN WPC.6146/2007 OF THIS COURT}

¶8

APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER IN W.P.(C)

¶9

¶10

HARIMOHAN M.K., AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.ACHUTHAN NAIR, KUNNUMMAL HOUSE, P.O.CHEMANCHERI, PIN - 673 304, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.P.K.IBRAHIM

¶12

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN W.P(C)

¶13

¶14

THE DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, COMMERCIAL BRANCH, PALAKKAD.

¶15

SMT.MASHOOTHA P.K., " YAMUNA", THIRUVANGOOR P.O., PIN - 673 318, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶16

R1 BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC-RAILWAYS R2 BY ADV.SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN

¶17

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

J.B. KOSHY, Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J.

¶19

W.A.No.1026 of 2007

¶20

Dated this the 23^th day of January, 2009.

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Koshy, Ag.C.J.

¶23

The petitioner's father died in an accident while he was carrying out his duties with the railways, and while he was in service. The petitioner's sister was then given a job of a Halting agent. When fresh applications were invited, the petitioner applied and he was found suitable in 1992. He was the Halting agent at Chemancheri. Ext.R1(a) circular of the Railway Board contained instructions and total outer limit for a Halting Agent is 15 years. Since the petitioner completed maximum 15 years on 6.2.2007, fresh appointment has to be made and vide Ext.R1(b) circular when fresh applications were invited three applications were received and since all of them were eligible candidates, selection had to be made by drawal of lots, and selection was made by lot. Advise memo was issued. Lot was taken in the presence of applicants and members of the selection

¶24

W.A.NO.1026/07

¶25

:: 2 ::

¶26

committee. The 2^nd respondent was selected. On the basis of the selection, the 2^nd respondent was appointed as Halting agent. The learned singe Judge, who considered the matter, found that there was no violation of the circular and guidelines of the railways. We see no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment. Now it is submitted that he has some unused tickets as well as some furniture left in the place. He can apply to the 1^st respondent for taking over the said articles and if such an application is filed, that should be considered and appropriate orders should be passed.

¶27

Writ appeal is disposed of accordingly.

¶28

Sd/( J.B. KOSHY)

¶29

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶30

sk/

¶31

//true copy//

¶32

P.S. to Judge

Harimohan.M.K. v. Divisional Commercial Manager & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harimohan.M.K. v. Divisional Commercial Manager & Another

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

Kerala Nurses & Midwives Council Vs L.Wilson

U.D.Shayi Vs K.Karunakaran

State of Kerala Vs P.K.M.College of Education

Social Welfare Society,Alleppey Vs the Government of Kerala

Kasthoorivayalkuni Moosa Haji Vs N.Kunhimoosa

Micheal Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board