Allowed

Anoop Mohan v. the Director of Panchayats,Trivandrum

Kerala HC11 Feb 2010WP(C)/2412/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a writ petition for non-consideration of the petitioner's district option during promotion. The court directed the respondent to post the petitioner as Accountant at Uzhavoor Grama Panchayat, Kottayam, within ten days, consistent with a prior reservation order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to post the petitioner as Accountant at Uzhavoor Grama Panchayat, Kottayam District, within ten days.

Anoop Mohan Vs the Director of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 22ND MAGHA 1931

¶4

WP(C).No. 2412 of 2010(B) -------------------------

¶5

PETITIONER(S):

¶6

¶7

ANOOP MOHAN, UPPER DIVISION CLERK, BELUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVs. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN SRI.A.HAROON RASHEED

¶9

RESPONDENT(S): ---------------

¶10

THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS, TRIVANDRUM.

¶11

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶14

W.P.(C) NO. 2412 OF 2010

¶15

Dated this the 11^th day of February, 2010

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner is working as an Upper Division Clerk under the Kerala Panchayat Subordinate Service. A new post of Accountant was created in the Department as per Exts.P2 and P3, which was to be filled up by promotion of Head Clerks and Senior Upper Division Clerks. As per Ext.P3, the personnel in the category of Head Clerks and Upper Division Clerks were called upon to exercise their option besides giving a declaration in the prescribed form attached to Ext.P3. The petitioner opted three Panchayats in Kottayam District, in terms of Ext.P3. The grievance of the petitioner is that nine persons who were working in Kollam District and had not opted Kottayam District, were given posting to Kottayam District on promotion whereas he was promoted and transferred to Kasaragod District, ignoring his option. Yet another contention raised by the petitioner is that three others, who were posted to far off places, were given suitable posting subsequently on their request, as is evident from Ext.P11. The petitioner also contends that an open

¶18

W.P.(C) NO. 2412/2010

¶19

¶20

vacancy is available in Kottayam District, which was duly reported as per Ext.P9. It was in the said circumstances that the petitioner assails the actions on the part the respondent in ignoring the option exercised by him in terms of Ext.P3 and effecting postings on promotion without a fixed criteria.

¶21

Resisting the claims and contentions of the petitioner, a statement has been filed by the respondent. It has been categorically stated therein that in the case of seniors who have opted a particular District, they were accommodated based on their option and in the case of others, posting to near Districts were given against available vacancies by reckoning their seniority in the feeder category. In short, the respondent denies arbitrariness in his action. At the same time, the statement would reveal that after effecting promotion and posting in the case of three others, taking into account their family problems, the posting given to them earlier were cancelled and they were given suitable posting. The stand taken by the respondent in the statement is that while effecting posting on promotion, the norms of transfer are also taken into account. In view of the order I propose to pass in this Writ Petition, I do not think it necessary to go into the merits of the rival contentions. I make it clear that the contentions available to both sides are reserved to be agitated in

¶22

W.P.(C) NO. 2412/2010

¶23

¶24

appropriate proceedings, if necessary.

¶25

As per Ext.P8 judgment in W.P.(C) No.35500 of 2009, this Court

¶26

had directed the respondent not to fill up one vacancy available in the category of Accountant in Kottayam District till a decision was taken on Ext.P6 therein. Admittedly, the said vacancy reserved as per Ext.P8 is still available at Uzhavoor Grama Panchayat, Kottayam. The stand taken by the respondent is that the objections and grievances of all promotees in the newly created post of Accountant regarding their postings will be considered during the General Transfer, 2010, in accordance with Exts.P2 and P3 and also the norms governing transfer. If that be so, there cannot be any impediment, now, in accommodating the petitioner in the vacancy reserved in terms of the direction contained in Ext.P8 judgment at Uzhavoor Grama Panchayat, Kottayam.

¶27

The Writ Petition is, therefore, disposed of with a direction to the respondent to pass appropriate orders giving the petitioner a posting as Accountant at Uzhavoor Grama Panchayat in Kottayam District within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this judgment will not stand in the way of reviewing his posting, in case the postings of Accountants are reviewed during the

¶28

W.P.(C) NO. 2412/2010

¶29

¶30

General Transfer, in terms of Exts.P2, P3 and the transfer norms applicable

¶31

to the Department.

¶32

(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)

¶33

sp/

¶34

W.P.(C) NO. 2412/2010

¶35

¶36

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶37

W.P.(C) NO.2412/2010

¶38

JUDGMENT

¶39

11^th February, 2010

Anoop Mohan v. the Director of Panchayats,Trivandrum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop Mohan v. the Director of Panchayats,Trivandrum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.K. Sasidharan Vs Hindustan Insecticides Limited

Asha Lawrence Vs Ivan Rathinam and Others

Jayalekshmi Vs State of Kerala

K.a.Krishna Pillai Vs R.Raja Raja Varma

Jose Wilfred Vs S.M.Vijayanand

V.N.Kuttan Vs State of Kerala