Petition challenged delay in declaring probation and sought seniority adjustments. The Court held the petition barred by res judicata considering a final judgment (Exhibit P3) on identical issues and dismissed it as non-maintainable due to absent interested parties.
Writ petition 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 MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/19TH KARTHIKA, 1938
WP(C).No. 2775 of 2010 (V)
PETITIONER(S):
D.GOPAKUMAR, SELECTION GRADE ASSISTANT, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI.
BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ
RESPONDENT(S):
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (CUSAT), REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR, KOCHI.
BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI,SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
WP(C).No. 2775 of 2010 (V) ---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT-P1- TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P2- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DECLARING THE PROBATION OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT-P3- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP.4215/2003 EXHIBIT-P4- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT EXHIBIT-P5- TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P6- TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION OF THE PETITION TO THE PROVISIONAL GRADATION LIST. EXHIBIT-P7- TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL GRADATION LIST. EXHIBIT-P8- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P9- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS -----------------------
EXHIBIT R1(A): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.34339/B2/07/HEDN.DATE 30/12/2008
/ TRUE COPY /
P.S. TO JUDGE
PJ
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.2775 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of November, 2016
JUDGMENT
W.P.(C).No.2775/10
2
the provisions of Statute 7 of Chapter III of the Cochin University First Statutes on Service Conditions of Teachers and other Staff of the University, 1981, the period of probation prescribed for persons appointed in University Service is one year on duty within a period of two years. It is contended that Statute 9 provides that Assistants Gr.II shall be required to pass the Secretariat Manual test for the purpose of drawing their first increment and Account Test (Lower) for the purpose of promotion as Assistant Gr.I. It is therefore contended that the petitioner's probation ought to have been declared with effect from 14.06.2000. The petitioner passed Accounts test (Lower) on 14.01.2000 and the Secretariat Manual test on 21.07.2000. The petitioner's probation was declared only with effect from 21.07.2000. The petitioner contends that this delay in declaring his probation has been detrimental to his interest and has resulted in losing seniority over other persons whose probation was declared earlier. The petitioner contends that since pass in Secretariat Manual test was necessary only for drawing the first increment, the petitioner's probation
W.P.(C).No.2775/10
3
ought to have been declared with effect from 14.06.2000 as against 21.07.2000 as has been done in the instant case.
4.With regard to the claim of the petitioner for seniority for the purpose of promotion and inclusion in the seniority list in preference to others whose names are mentioned in the prayer, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University would contend that such a claim cannot be considered by this Court without the parties likely to be affected on the party array. It is contended that the seniority list which is being operated is already in force and the prayers as sought for cannot be granted without challenging the same. It is further contended that the claim of the petitioner with regard to the declaration of probation from 14.06.2000 is squarely hit by res judicata as the petitioner has raised the same contention before this Court in W.P.(C).No.4215 of 2003.
W.P.(C).No.2775/10
4
Exhibit P3 produced by the petitioner is the judgment. It is contended that the specific prayer in that writ petition was to quash Exhibits P1(a) and P1(b) orders, which were issued to the petitioners therein. Exhibit P1(b) memo is reproduced at page 4 of Exhibit P3 judgment and it reads as follows:-
“You failed to acquire the obligatory Departmental Test qualifications for promotion within the period of one year from the date of joining the University Service as Assistant Grade-II. Therefore, as per proviso to Rule 28(a)(i) KS &SSR you are not eligible for protection of seniority over your juniors who had fulfilled both the requirements of completion of one year on duty and the acquisition of obligatory departmental test qualification ahead of you”.
W.P.(C).No.2775/10
5
W.P.(C).No.2775/10
6
extracted earlier, I am of the view that the same question was considered by this Court in Exhibit P3 judgment. Exhibit P3 judgment has also become final.
In the above view of the matter, I am of the opinion that this writ petition with the prayers mentioned above is not maintainable before this Court as it is squarely hit by res judicata. This Court is disabled from considering the contentions raised by the petitioner in this writ petition. This is more so in view of the fact that the none of the seniors shown in the seniority list, who are likely to be affected, are made parties to the writ petition. I find no reason to entertain this writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.
sd/- Anu Sivaraman, Judge
sj10/11
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking declaration of probation date and seniority is barred by res judicata due to a final judgment in the same matter.
Whether the writ petition is maintainable given that stakeholders in the seniority list have not been made parties.
D. Gopakumar
Cochin University of Science and Technology
Anu Sivaraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Anu Sivaraman
Parties & counsel
