Disposed

S.Gireesh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Dec 2014WP(C)/26810/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Conductors sought reckoning of past service as Empanelled Conductors due to regularization delays. Court disposed petition directing respondent Corporation to consider representations applying prior court ratios within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to second respondent to consider petitioners' representation and pass orders within eight weeks regarding reckoning of past service as Empanelled Conductors.

S.Gireesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 26810 of 2014 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

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

¶8

1. S.GIREESH KUMAR,

¶9

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KANIYAPURAM DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

2. P.SAJEEV,

¶11

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KILIMANOOR DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

3. N.DHARMARAJAN,

¶13

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ATTINGAL DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

4. S.SHIJUKUMAR,

¶15

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ATTINGAL DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

5. B.SUGATHAN,

¶17

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHATHANNOOR DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶18

6. S.K.AJITH,

¶19

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHATHANNOOR DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶20

7. G.PRASAD,

¶21

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHATHANNOOR DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶22

8. RAJESH,

¶23

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHATHANNOOR DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶24

9. M.AZAD,

¶25

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHATHANNOOR DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶26

10. C.RAJESH KUMAR

¶27

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHATHANNOOR DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶28

WP(C).No. 26810 of 2014 (A)

¶29

11. S.LEKHA

¶30

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHATHANNOOR DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶31

12. S.DILEEPKUMAR,

¶32

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHATHANNOOR DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶33

13. M.R.KRISHNAKUMAR,

¶34

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PANDALAM DEPOT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶35

14. M.SANTHOSH, CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ADOOR DEPOT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶36

15. S.KARTHIKEYAN,

¶37

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ADOOR DEPOT, PATHANAMTHITTA

¶38

16. M.G.SURESH, CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ADOOR DEPOT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶39

17. OOMMEN C. JOHN,

¶40

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ADOOR DEPOT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶41

18. K.DEVADAS,

¶42

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PUNALUR DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶43

19. Y.A.SHAHALUDEEN,

¶44

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CENTRAL DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶45

20. V.K.HEMACHANDRAN, CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CENTRAL DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶46

21. V.C.ANILKUMAR,

¶47

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CENTRAL DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶48

22. C.S.JAFAR SHAH, CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CENTRAL DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶49

WP(C).No. 26810 of 2014 (A)

¶50

23. K.AJIKUMAR,

¶51

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KARUNGAPPALLY DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶52

24. R.RAJESH, CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KARUNGAPPALLY DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶53

25. H.ABDUL RASHEED,

¶54

CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KARUNGAPPALLY DEPOT, KOLLAM.

¶55

26. MANOJ KUMAR C.H., CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THALASSERY DEPOT, KANNUR.

¶56

27. SAHAJAN M., CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KANNUR DEPOT, KANNUR.

¶57

BY ADVS.DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)

¶58

SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN SRI.SIDDHARTH KRISHNAN

¶59

RESPONDENT(S):

¶60

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

¶61

1. STATE OF KERALA,

¶62

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, TRANSPORT (A) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANATHAPURAM-695 001.

¶63

2. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR

¶64

KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANATHAPURAM-695 023.

¶65

R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC, KSRTC.

¶66

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶67

RVS.

¶68

WP(C).No. 26810 of 2014 (A)

¶69

APPENDIX

¶70

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶71

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

¶72

EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(MS) NO.77/2011 TRAN. DATED 22/12/2011.

¶73

EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 25/09/2014.

¶74

EXT.P3. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17/6/2014 IN WPC NO.14388/2012.

¶75

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶76

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

NIL.

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

RVS.

Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.

¶82

W.P.(C)No.26810 of 2014 A

¶83

Dated this the 8^th day of December, 2014

¶84

JUDGMENT

¶85

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Sanding Counsel for the respondent Corporation, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.

¶86

Briefly stated, the petitioners, initially appointed as Empanelled Conductors based on the rank list published by the Kerala Public Service Commission, had their services regularised. The grievance of the petitioners is that owing to the delay in reporting the vacancies to the Public Service Commission, the petitioners were kept as Empanelled Conductors for a long time and later they were regularised.

¶87

WPC 26810/14

¶88

¶89

Seeking reckoning of their past service as

¶90

Empanelled Conductors for the limited purpose of service benefits without any claim to seniority and monetary benefits, the petitioners are said to have made Exhibit P2 representation before the respondent Corporation. Complaining of delay in its consideration, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.

¶91

The learned counsel for the petitioners has strenuously contended that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by Exhibit P3 judgment rendered by this Court. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation, on the other hand, has submitted that the factual matrix of the present writ petition differs from that of Exhibit P3 judgment. According to her, the ratio laid down therein does not have any application.

¶92

WPC 26810/14

¶93

¶94

Be that as it may, in the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the second respondent to consider Exhibit P2 representation of the petitioners keeping in view the ratio laid down by this Court in Exhibit P3 judgment and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶95

It is made clear that the respondent authorities may consider the request of any one of the petitioners to be heard in person at the time of the respondent Corporation considering Exhibit P2 representation.

¶96

Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge

¶97

tkv

S.Gireesh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Gireesh Kumar v. State of Kerala

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

Meena T.S. Vs Smt.Suman N.S.

P.Balakrishnan Vs the Palakkad Municipality

P.Dhanapal Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

Anupriya S. Vs University of Calicut

T.v.Krishnan Namboothiri Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

R. Radhakrishnan Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.