Dismissed

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Othe v. Babu Thomas

Kerala HC5 Aug 2011WA/1346/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ appeal regarding promotion disputes. The bench held there was no grievance regarding the 1st appellant as the Single Judge only directed them to explain why the respondent was not promoted before his juniors. The right to appeal was closed without examining promotion correctness.

What did the court decide?

Direction to appellant to communicate reply regarding respondent's non-promotion within two months; appeal closed.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Othe Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933 WA.No. 1346 of 2007() --------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.27662/2000 Dated 27/03/2006 ....................

¶3

APPELLANTS/ RESPONDENTS

¶4

------------------------1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., HEAD OFFICE, 24, WHITES ROAD, MADRAS - 600014 REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶5

2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, (PERSONNEL & MARKETING) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., HEAD OFFICE, 24, WHITES ROAD, MADRAS - 600014.

¶6

3. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, KOCHI.

¶7

4. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM.

¶8

5. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, PONKUNNAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR

¶10

RESPONDENT/ PETITIONER

¶11

------------------------BABU THOMAS, S/O LATE K.C.THOMAS, AGED 39 YEARS, DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, GRADE-1, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. PONKUNNAM BRANCH OFFICE, KERALA RESIDING AT KOOTUMKAL, CHENNAKUNNU, PONKUNNAM P.O., KERALA.

¶12

ADV. SRI.SATHISH NINAN FOR R1 SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW FOR R1

¶13

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.

¶15

W.A.No.1346 OF 2007

¶16

Dated this the 5^th day of August, 2011

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

~~~~~~~~~~~

¶19

C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶20

Heard the learned standing counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. After hearing both sides and after going through the judgment, we do not find any grievance for the 1^st appellant because the learned Single Judge only directed the 1^st appellant to consider why preference over respondent was given to juniors who were promoted. We do not want to go into the correctness or otherwise of the promotions given to others who are not parties to this case. All what is required for the appellant is to give explanation as to why the respondent was not promoted before the promotion given to his juniors. Leaving open to the 1^st appellant to give the explanation to the respondent by way of reply to his representation, we close the Writ Appeal. The 1^st appellant shall communicate the reply to the representation pursuant to the direction issued by the learned Single Judge within two months from now.

¶21

(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)

¶22

( P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE)

¶23

ps/6/8

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Othe v. Babu Thomas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Othe v. Babu Thomas

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

Jagratha Samithi Vs Joseph

M.Abin Suraj Vs Dr.P.P.Mohammed

The Administrator,Utl and Another Vs Sajitha Beegum and Another

M/S.Tmt Granites (P) Ltd. Vs the Agricultural Income Tax

Adv.Suresh Babu.P.K. Vs Circle Inspector of Excise and Others

Dr.Sujatha Rani Vs the Federal Bank Ltd.Rep.by the Chief Ma