The Division Bench dismissed an intra-court appeal regarding a retired staff member's seniority and promotion claims. The court found no ground to interfere with the single Judge's order, holding the intra-court appeal failed.
Writ appeal (W.A.No.748 of 2013) dismissed; original writ petition (W.P.(C).24232/2006) remains dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/24TH POUSHA, 1937
WA.No. 748 of 2013 () IN WP(C).24232/2006
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 24232/2006 DATED 28-02-2013
APPELLANT/APPELLANT/PETIONER:
P.JAGANATHA SARMA SPECIAL GRADE SUB GROUP OFFICER KULATHUPUZHA PUNALUR GROUP TRAVANDORE DEVASWOM BOARD (NOW RETIRED) P.J.BHAVAN ELAVOOR, PALLIMON P.O., VIA KANNANALLOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.SASIKUMAR
SRI.S.KANNAN
RESPONDENTS:
BY ADV. SMT.A.SREEKALA, SC, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 6-01-2016, THE COURT ON 14-01-2016 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & ANU SIVARAMAN, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.A.No.748 of 2013
= = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 14th day of January, 2016 JUDGMENT
A nu Sivaraman, J.
1.This appeal is preferred by the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.2432 of 2006 against the judgment of the learned single Judge. The appellant was appointed in the service of the Travancore Devaswom Board as Santhikaran on 01.01.1973. He was promoted as Sub Group Officer Grade-II on 11.9.1980 and as Sub Group Officer Grade-I on 01.11.1987. He was suspended from service on 24.02.1988. By Ext.P1 proceedings dated 15.12.1988, the appellant/petitioner was reverted as Sub Group Officer Grade-II pursuant to disciplinary proceedings which were initiated and completed by the employer. He was reinstated in service as Sub Group Officer Grade-II on the basis of Ext.P1. Pursuant to representations preferred by the appellant and the direction issued by this Court to dispose of the same, Ext.P3 order was issued by the first respondent TDB cancelling the earlier punishment of reversion and imposing a lesser punishment of barring of two increments without cumulative effect.
W.A.No.748 of 2013
2
2.While the petitioner was under suspension, the Board had issued Ext.P4 seniority list of Sub Group Officers Grade-I, where the petitioner's name figured at serial No.67, between one S.Chandra Babu and R.B Sreekantan Nair, who were featured as serial Nos.66 and 68 respectively. Thereafter, on 20.06.1996, the Board issued a combined seniority list of Head Clerks and Sub Group Officers in which the petitioner's name was not included. Petitioner claims that he was entitled to be included at Sl.No.96 in the category of Head Clerks and Higher Grade Sub Group Officers just below K.G.Ravikumar, who is the last person in the said list. Claiming this benefit, the petitioner approached the first respondent Board. That was rejected by Ext.P8 order. Challenging Ext.P8, the petitioner had again approached this Court and by Ext.P10 judgment, this Court had directed the first respondent Board to consider the objections preferred by the petitioner to Ext.P6, untrammelled by the observations in Ext.P8. Pursuant thereto, Ext.P12 order has been rendered rejecting the request made by the petitioner for assignment of better rank in the seniority list. Aggrieved thereby, the writ petition is filed.
W.A.No.748 of 2013
3
3.The first respondent Board had filed a counter affidavit in the writ petition contending that the petitioner, on cancellation of reversion, is entitled to promotion only with effect from the date when his immediate junior was promoted. In Ext.P4 seniority list, petitioner's name is shown just below Sri.R.B.Sreekantan Nair. Petitioner is therefore entitled to promotion as Sub Group Officer Higher Grade and Special Grade only with effect from the dates on which Sri.R.B.Sreekantan Nair was so promoted. Since this is the effect and essence of Ext.P12 order, the said order was perfectly justified, it is contended.
the learned single Judge found that the petitioner had been given all the benefits and he would have been entitled to on the basis of the date of promotion of his immediate junior. It was also found that there was no illegality or irregularity in Ext.P12 order and the writ petition was therefore dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, this writ appeal is filed.
W.A.No.748 of 2013
4
6.It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant's juniors in Ext.P4 list had been promoted to the post of Sub Group Officer Higher Grade with effect from 01.05.1992 and as Special Grade Sub Group Officer by order dated 29.11.2001. It is contended that the appellant himself had actually been promoted as Sub Group Officer Higher Grade with effect from 01.12.1993 and by Ext.P5 order the Devaswom Commissioner had directed that the appellant's name would be included in the seniority list below Sri.K.G.Ravikumar and above Sri.R.B.Sreekantan Nair. It is the further contention of the appellant that it was only due to the disciplinary proceedings taken against him that the promotion of Sri.R.B.Sreekantan Nair as Sub Group Officer was delayed till 19.02.1994 and that the finding in Ext.P12 to the effect that the appellant was entitled for promotion as Sub Group Officer Higher Grade only with effect from that date is totally erroneous and unsustainable.
W.A.No.748 of 2013
5
8.We have considered the rival contentions as well as the pleadings and the materials on record. It is clear from Ext.P4 that the appellant was included in the seniority list of Sub Group Officer Grade-I at Sl.No.67 between Sri.S.Chandrababu and Sri.R.B.Sreekantan Nair. Apart from the assertion made by the appellant in his reply affidavit, no material is forthcoming to show that the appellant's immediate junior Sri.R.B.Sreekantan Nair had been denied promotions of Sub Group Officer Higher Grade and Special Grade at the appropriate times due to the pendency of any disciplinary proceedings. The appellant had also not produced materials before the learned single Judge to show that his juniors in Ext.P4 list had been promoted as Higher Grade Sub Group Officers w.e.f 01.05.1992. Such persons, above whom the appellant
W.A.No.748 of 2013
6
claims seniority, have also not been arrayed as parties to the writ petition. In the above circumstances, the learned single Judge held that the appellant is entitled to restoration of seniority on cancellation of reversion only with effect from the date on which his immediate junior was promoted. This is the principle followed in Ext.P12 as well.
In the result, this appeal is dismissed.
sd/-
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, Judge
sd/- Anu Sivaraman, Judge
sj
TRUE COPY
P.A.TO JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the order dismissal of the writ petition appealing the single Judge's decision.
P.Jaganatha Sarma
Travancore Devaswom Board
Devaswom Commissioner - Travancore Devaswom Board
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan
Anu Sivaraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
