The High Court dismissed the writ appeal against the judgment terminating the petitioner from service for unauthorized absence. The Court held that as the validity of the termination order was not challenged before the Single Judge, the appeal was not maintainable, though the petitioner could seek a review.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2009 / 24TH ASHADHA 1931
WA.No. 1486 of 2009()
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP.4302/1999 dated 17.2.2009
APPELLANT: PETITIONER
M.M.IBRAHIM, MANIYATH HOUSE, KARIKULAM, P.O.VELUPADAM, TRICHUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.M.P.KRISHNAN NAIR
RESPONDENT: RESPONDENTS
CHIMONY DAM PROJECT DIVISION, CHIMONY DAM P.O., ALAGAPPANAGAR VIA., TRICHUR DISTRICT.
BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVASIS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
&
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
--------------------------------------------W.A. NO. 1486 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of July, 2009
JUDGMENT
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The writ petitioner is the appellant. He approached this Court mainly challenging Ext.P12 order by which he was terminated from service on the ground of unauthorised absence. He also prayed for regularisation of his service with effect from 20.1.1990, on the strength of Ext.P2 Government Order, G.O.(P) No. 6/90 PW & T dated 20.1.1990. The learned Single Judge noticed that regularisation of service as per Ext.P2 was possible, if only the writ petitioner was in service as a CLR worker on or before 19.5.1983 and has a minimum service of 500 days as on 1.4.1987. The learned Single Judge found that no reliable material was produced to show that those two conditions were satisfied in the case of the petitioner. Based on that finding, the Writ Petition was dismissed. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment, this Writ Appeal is filed.
W.A. NO. 1486/2009
2
W.A. NO. 1486/2009
3
In the result, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. But, this will not affect
the rights, if any, of the appellant to move the learned Single Judge in
review.
(K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR) JUDGE
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE
sp/
W.A. NO. 1486/2009
4
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR &
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
W.A. NO.1486/2009
JUDGMENT
15th July, 2009
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal challenging termination from service and seeking regularisation is maintainable when the validity of the impugned order was not considered by the lower court.
Whether the appellant can claim regularisation when conditions for service regularisation were not satisfied as per the learned Single Judge's finding.
M.M.IBRAHIM
THE CHIEF SECRETARY, STATE OF KERALA
K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
C.T. RAVIKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
