Allowed

Sushama.K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Jun 2016OP(KAT)/67/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the State to depute petitioners for Female Health Supervisory Training in the next batch, pending final orders by the Administrative Tribunal on their claims for promotion and seniority, citing similar reliefs granted to juniors by this Court.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to depute petitioners for training in the next batch subject to final Tribunal orders.

Sushama.K Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/20TH JYAISHTA, 1938

¶6

OP(KAT).No. 67 of 2016 (Z)

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA(EKM)No.45/2015 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 15.1.2015

¶8

PETITIONER :

¶9

SUSHAMA.K,

¶10

JUNIOR PUBLIC HEALTH NURSE GRADE I, PUBLIC HEALTH CENTRE, PANAVALLY RESIDING AT PADIKKEPARAMBU VELI, VARANADU P.O, CHERTHALA.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ SRI.BIJITH S.KHAN SMT.E.S.SONI

¶12

RESPONDENTS :

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

¶14

DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶15

DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER (HEALTH SERVICES), ALAPPUZHA.

¶16

BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.C.VINCENT

¶17

THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-06-2016, ALONG WITH OPKAT. 68/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

OP(KAT).No. 67 of 2016 (Z)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :-

¶21

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.A (EKM)45/2015 DATED 15-01-2015. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 08-04-2016. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 27-04-2016. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION DATED 13-01-2015.

¶22

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL.

¶23

True copy

¶24

P.A to Judge

¶25

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ.

¶26

O.P.(KAT)Nos.67 & 68 of 2016

¶27

-----------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 10^th day of June, 2016

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Ramachandra Menon, J.

¶30

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking for a direction to be issued to the respondent to depute them for undergoing Female Health Supervisory Training in the next batch as done in Exts.P2 and P3 (in the concerned cases).

¶31

It is stated that the grievance is pending consideration before the Tribunal by way of O.A.(Ekm)No.45/2015 and O.A. (Ekm)No.46/2015, wherein an interim order has been passed as borne by Ext.P1 on 15.1.2015. But the direction given by the Tribunal to have considered the objection is stated as not considered and the State is proceeding with further steps deputing other persons even juniors to the petitioners for training which is essential for the purpose of promotion to the next higher post of Supervisor and hence the grievance.

¶32

The factual position revealed is that the petitioners were appointed as Junior Public Health Nurse Grade II on

¶33

¶34

O.P.(KAT)Nos.67 & 68 of 2016

¶35

6.9.1993 and 13.9.1993 respectively, by virtue of their

¶36

credentials. According to the petitioners, they were entitled to be promoted as Junior Public Health Nurse Grade I way back in the

¶37

year 1997 itself; but because of the lapse on the part of the Government/Department it was ordered only in the year 2007, however with retrospective effect from 1997.

¶38

It is stated that the petitioners were working in Malappuram and subsequently, they got transferred to their home District/Alappuzha in the year 2004 and 2001 respectively. The petitioners are continuing accordingly. In the meanwhile, a provisional list was prepared by the Government/Department showing the names of eligible persons to be deputed for training, wherein the petitioners were included; but subsequently, based

¶39

on some objections the petitioners were transferred to their home District and as such, their seniority will be reckoned only with effect from the date of joining in the transferred District. They came to be removed from the list and they were not included for sending for the training. This was sought to be challenged by filing O.A.Nos.45 & 46/2015 before the Tribunal.

¶40

¶41

O.P.(KAT)Nos.67 & 68 of 2016

¶42

When the matters came up for consideration the Tribunal, after analysing the facts and figures, passed Ext.P1 interim order giving a direction to the Director of Health Services to consider

¶43

the objections preferred by the applicants and to pass appropriate orders at the earliest. It was also made clear that, if it was ultimately found that a senior hand had been overlooked and a junior hand had been admitted for training, that senior shall not be superseded in the matter of promotion for want of training and the junior shall not be allowed to supersede the seniors on the ground that he/she was able to clear the training earlier. The matter is still pending consideration.

¶44

The grievance popped up again, when the concerned authority paid only scant regards to the orders passed by the Tribunal in considering the objections and setting the matters right. Another list was published in respect of the subsequent batch, who are to be sent for training, wherein also the petitioners were not included. Projecting similar grievance, some other persons, who are juniors to the petitioners, approached the Tribunal seeking for similar reliefs, wherein interim orders were

¶45

O.P.(KAT)Nos.67 & 68 of 2016

¶46

¶47

passed permitting the said applicants to be sent for training on a provisional basis. Pursuant to the said interim order, the Director of Health Services considered the matter and passed Exts.P2 and P3 orders dated 8.4.2016 and 27.4.2016 respectively; whereby the concerned persons have been enlisted to be sent for training for six months commencing from July, 2016 onwards. The petitioners submit that no such orders have been passed in their case and their case stands listed for final hearing, the pleadings having incompleted. It is also pointed out that, on an earlier instance, some similarly situated persons had approached this Court by filing O.P.(KAT)No.48/2016, wherein an interim order was passed enabling the said petitioners to undergo the training. Based on the said order, they have also been included in the list. It is brought to our notice that, taking note of the sequence of events, the said interim order was subsequently made absolute and O.P. was disposed of.

¶48

Heard the learned Senior Government Pleader as well, who seeks for time to get instructions. Time was granted by this Court on the three previous occasions, but no instructions are

¶49

O.P.(KAT)Nos.67 & 68 of 2016

¶50

¶51

forthcoming. The non-compliance of the direction given by the Tribunal to have the objection raised by the petitioners/applicants considered stands still to be satisfied. Though no time limit was specified by the Tribunal, it was obligatory for the concerned respondents to have it considered and disposed of giving effect of the order passed by the Tribunal in the right spirit and perspective. The failure in this regard, prima facie, amounts to contempt. However, we do not intend to express anything further in this regard, as the same is not a subject matter of this O.P. It is for the petitioners to move the Tribunal for appropriate proceedings, if they desire so and if they are so advised.

¶52

With regard to the reliefs sought for, in so far as the Tribunal has passed similar orders in similar circumstances, even permitting the Juniors of the petitioners to undergo training, as put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioners and further since another bench of this Court has already granted an interim order as revealed from the order dated 22.4.2016 in O.P.(KAT) No.48/2016 and since the said O.P. came to be closed subsequently making the interim order absolute, this Court does

¶53

O.P.(KAT)Nos.67 & 68 of 2016

¶54

¶55

not intend to take a different view, though the relief sought for in the present Original Petitions as such is not liable to be entertained by this Court at the first instance but to be dealt with by the Tribunal.

¶56

In the above circumstances, we direct the respondents to depute the petitioners also for training in the next batch itself, which will be subject to final orders to be passed by the Tribunal in O.A.(Ekm)Nos.45 & 46/2015.

¶57

Both these Original Petitions are disposed of accordingly.

¶58

Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶59

Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶60

skj

¶61

True copy

¶62

P.A to Judge

Sushama.K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushama.K 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

Union of India Vs K.Sujatha

Sreejesh K. Vs Union of India

V.P. Priyadarshanan Vs Union of India

Sonia Viswam Vs State of Kerala

S.M.Shefeek Vs State of Kerala

Shabu Vs Anju