D.Kalamony v. the Secretary to Govt.
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court disposed of two writ petitions concerning institutional promotions. It held that a belated promotion claim by one employee was barred by principles of sit back theory. However, it affirmed other promotions based on eligibility and service years, dismissing a seniority dispute and confirming subsequent institute orders.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2016/11TH CHAITHRA, 1938
WP(C).No. 11730 of 2006 (U)
PETITIONER(S):
D. KALAMONY, AGED 48 YEARS, W/O. JANARANSON, ASSOCIATE PROGRAMME CO-ORDINATOR STATE RESOURCE CENTRE, KERALA, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, RESIDING AT KATTUMUDUMBIL VEEDU KOONTHALLOOR, CHIRAYINKIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.A.RAJAN SRI.K.S.SALIM RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE RESOURCE CENTRE, KERALA, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. 3. THE DIRECTOR, STATE RESOURCE CENTRE, KERALA, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. R. JAYASREEKUNJAMMA, PROGRAMME CO-ORDINATOR, STATE RESOURCE CENTRE, KERALA PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. B. CHANDRABANU, PROGRAMME ASSOCIATE, STATE RESOURCE CENTRE, KERALA PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. DR. N.B. SURESHKUMAR, PROGRAMME CO-ORDINATOR, STATE RESOURCE CENTRE, KERALA PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the 4th respondent can claim retrospective promotion as Programme Associate from 1994 despite the Special Rules coming into force in 1998.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to promotion over the 4th respondent who achieved higher posts judicially.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
D. KALAMONY
- respondent
R. JAYASREEKUNJAMMA
Coram
K. VINOD CHANDRAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court