Dismissed

M.C.Sanalkumar v. the State and Others

Kerala HC21 Jun 2010WP(C)/15586/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismissed a writ petition challenging a government order reversion of a Printer Grd.II to Lascar Grd.II. The court held that since the petitioner failed to complete 2 years duty in a continuous 3-year period, as evidenced by the sanctioned order, the reversion was lawful and unassailable.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed, and the Ext.P9 order of reversion was upheld.

M.C.Sanalkumar Vs the State and Others — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2010 / 31ST JYAISTHA 1932

¶5

WP(C).No. 15586 of 2010(W)

PETITIONER(S):

M.C.SANALKUMAR,PRINTER,IIND GRADE GOVERNMENT PRESS,SHORNUR,PALAKKAD.RESIDING AT SUDARSANA,EAST VILLAGE,KOLLENGODE,PALAKKAD.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

¶13

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

¶14

THE DIRECTOR OF PRINTING,GOVERNMENT CENTRAL PRESS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT,GOVERNMENT PRESS SHORNUR,PALAKKAD.

¶16

BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ARAVIND BABU

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

¶19

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

¶20

W.P.(C) NO.15586 OF 2010 (W)

¶21

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

¶22

Dated this the 21^st day of June, 2010

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

Challenge in this writ Petition is against Ext.P9 order reverting the petitioner from the post of Printer Grd.II. to the post of Lascar Grd.II. Reason stated in Ext.P9 is that since the petitioner did not complete 2 years duty within the continuous period of 3 years, his probation has not been declared.

¶25

It is stated in Ext.P9 that though the petitioner was appointed as Printer Grd.II on 6.3.2000, till now the petitioner has not completed 2 years duty within a continuous period of 3 years for declaration of his probation. It is also stated that there is no provision for further extension and that therefore he is reverted.

¶26

Counsel for the petitioner relies on Exts.P1and P2. According to the petitioner by Ext.P1, the third respondent required the 2^nd respondent to place a proposal for declaration of probation of the petitioner and on that basis the 3^rd respondent placed Ext.P2 proposal before the 2^nd respondent. It is stated that in Ext.P2 the 3rd respondent has accepted that the petitioner has discharged

¶27

WPC.No.15586 /2010

¶28

:2 :

¶29

duty for a period of 2 years during the continuous period of 3 years and therefore the contrary view taken in Ext.P9 is illegal. On this basis, it is argued that petitioner's reversion is illegal.

¶30

However, on instruction Government Pleader submits that though based on Ext.P1, the 3^rd respondent had submitted Ext.P2 proposal that was rejected by the 2^nd respondent. It is stated that reasons for his rejection was that during the continuous period of 3 years, the petitioner has not discharged for 2 years duty and as the petitioner did not render sufficient service for declaration of probation the only option available to the authorities was to revert the petitioner.

¶31

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, if the petitioner has not rendered sufficient service to have his probation declared this court will not be justified in finding fault with Ext.P9 order. In the above circumstances Exts.P1 or P2 will not help the petitioner. Consequently, Ext.P9 reversion of the petitioner is unassailable and is to be upheld.

¶32

Writ Petition fails and is dismissed.

¶33

(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE

¶34

vi/

¶35

WPC.No.15586 /2010

¶36

:3 :

M.C.Sanalkumar v. the State and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.C.Sanalkumar v. the State and Others

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

P.Hamza and Another Vs Jolly Varghese

J.Raveendran Vs S.Sasidharan

Bindu Krishnankutty Vs State of Kerala

Sumathi C. and Others Vs State of Kerala and Others

S. Asok Kumar Vs State of Kerala

P.Samraj Vs the State of Kerala and Others