Disposed

P.M.John v. the Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.

Kerala HC23 Nov 2016WP(C)/2997/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition for retrospective effect of promotion. Court directed the employer to consider the petitioner's request for retroactive promotion with effect from January 1, 2010, within one month, following Industrial Tribunal award and Government acceptance.

What did the court decide?

Order directing the 1st respondent to consider petitioner's representation for retrospective promotion within one month.

P.M.John Vs the Travancore Sugars & Chemicals… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 2997 of 2015 (Y)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

P.M.JOHN,AGED 55 YEARS,

¶8

S/O/.P.M MATHAI,DEPUTY MANAGER(MECHANICAL),TRAVANCORE SUGARS AND CHEMICALS LTS,VALANJAVATTOM, THIRUVALLA 689 104 (RESIDING AT PULLANCHERIL PUTHEN VEEDU,VALANJAVATTOM P.O,THIRUVALLA 689 104)

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.N.ASHOK KUMAR

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. THE TRAVANCORE SUGARS & CHEMICALS LTD, VLANAVATTOM P.O,THIRUVALLA 689 104

¶12

REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶13

2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF TAXES,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 001.

¶14

*** ADDL R3 IMPLEADED**

¶15

3. N.P.GEORGE NADUVELIPARAMBIL, PALIYAKARA, NEAR MARKET JUNCTION, THIRUVALLA, (SUPERVISOR, ELECTRICAL SECTION, TRAVANCORE SUGARS AND CHEMICALS LTD, THIRUVALLA.)

¶16

ADDL R3 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER ORDER DATED 26.3.2015 IN IA NO 3435/2015.

¶17

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR

¶18

SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS

¶19

R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI BIJOY CHANDRAN R3 BY ADV. SMT.INDU SUSAN JACOB

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

K.V.

¶22

WP(C).No. 2997 of 2015 (Y)

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶25

EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC NO 19718/2008 DATED 1-7-2008.

¶26

EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 14-08-2008 OF 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶27

EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF AWARD DATED 1-2-2013 IN I.D NO 3/2012 OF THE COURT OF INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,KOLLAM.

¶28

EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 3-9-2011 OF GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶29

EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF OFFICE ORDER DATED 8-08--2006 OF 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶30

EXT.P5A TRUE COPY OF OFFICE ORDER DATED 20-06-2008 OF 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶31

EXT.P5B TRUE COPY OF OFFICE ORDER DATED 10/12 RS 2008 OF 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶32

EXT.P5C TRUE COPY OF OFFICE ORDER DATED 14-07-2009 OF 1ST RESPONDENT

¶33

EXT.P5D TRUE COPY OF OFFICE ORDER DATED 20-10-2010 OF 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶34

EXT.P5E TRUE COPY OF OFFICE ORDER DATED 22-10-2010 OF 1ST RESPONDENT

¶35

EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 25-2-2014 OF 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶36

EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12/12/2014.

¶37

EXT P8 COPY OF LETTER DATED 19.2.2015 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶38

EXT P9 COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER SUCH AS G.O.(MS) NO 119/2001/ID DATED 1.8.2001.

¶39

EXT P10 COPY OF ORDER DATED 12.6.2007 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶40

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

K.V.

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶45

W.P(C).No. 2997 of 2015

¶46

Dated this the 23^rd November, 2016

¶47

JUDGMENT

¶48

The claim of the petitioner in this writ petition is limited to the retrospective effect for his promotion as Deputy Manger (Mechanical). Pursuant to Exhibit P3 award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, it is submitted that the petitioner has been promoted as Deputy Manger (Mechanical) on 1.3.2013. The petitioner joined service as Mechanic on 21.10.1981 and was promoted as Mechanical Supervisor on 1.9.1994. The petitioner contends that he had acquired qualifications for promotion as Deputy Manger. It is further stated that a vacancy of Deputy Manager (Mechanical) arose in the Company on 1.5.2008. When the petitioner was not promoted, he had made a request before the Company, which was rejected by Exhibit P2 order dated 14.8.2008 stating the he was not qualified for promotion.

¶49

Thereafter, by Exhibit P3 Award dated 1.2.2013, the Industrial Tribunal held that the petitioner was qualified for promotion to the post of Deputy Manager (Mechanical) on the strength of a one man Commission report which had considered

¶50

¶51

WP(C).2997/15

¶52

the question of pay revision as well as the service conditions including regular promotion to posts in the Company. Though it was contended by the Company that the report had not received the assent of the Government as is required, the Industrial Tribunal found that the same is to be acted upon. The petitioner was, therefore, directed to be promoted and has been promoted as Deputy Manager (Mechanical) on 1.3.2013.

¶53

The petitioner has preferred Exhibit P7 representation before the respondents seeking retrospective effect to his promotion as Deputy Manager (Mechanical). It is contended that the one man Commission report was accepted by the Company and assent was also granted by the Government to the same in the year 2014. It is stated in paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit filed by the 1^st respondent that the one man Commission report recommending revision of pay as well as promotion policy of workers and staff has been accepted by the Government as per order dated 24.2.2014 with effect from 1.1.2010. The petitioner contends that his claim for promotion as Deputy Manager is to be considered at least with effect from 1.1.2010, in view of the fact that the vacancy of Deputy Manager (Mechanical) was in existence at the relevant time.

¶54

¶55

WP(C).2997/15

¶56

In the above circumstances, the 1^st respondent is directed to take up Exhibit P7 request made by the petitioner and to consider and pass appropriate orders on the same with notice to the petitioner within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶57

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶58

ANU SIVARAMAN

¶59

JUDGE

¶60

vgs25/11

P.M.John v. the Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.M.John v. the Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.D. Bashardeen Vs Centre for Earth Science Studies

Jameela P. Vs State of Kerala

V.R.Jayakrishna Vs Kerala Gramin Bank

Manoj Kumar Vs Managing Director, K.H.R.W.S

Donald Brian Saimon Vs Andra Bank

Siji D. Poruthur Vs the State of Kerala