Petitioners challenged denial of promotion despite vacancies, conceding prior one-time promotion under a settlement. The Court held the settlement covering workmen promotion was binding and exclusive, preventing further claims.
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 SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/18TH JYAISHTA, 1938
WP(C).No. 347 of 2011 (P) --------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
1. N.P.MADHUSOODANAN, ASSISTANT OFFICER (FIN)-SUB LAYER, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, M/S.FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD, HEAD OFFICE, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O., ALUVA.
2. A.V.VENUGOPAL, ASSISTANT OFFICER (FIN)-SUB LAYER, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, M/S.FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD, HEAD OFFICE, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O., ALUVA.
3. V.N.GEETHA, ASSISTANT OFFICER (FIN)-SUB LAYER, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, M/S.FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD, HEAD OFFICE, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O., ALUVA.
RESPONDENT(S):
BY ADVS.SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, SC
SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
WP(C).No. 347 of 2011 (P)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS:
| EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE |
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE |
|---|---|
| DATED 28.2.2009 | CONSTITUTED BY THE MANAGEMENT. |
| EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE |
LETTER DATED 5.4.2010 OBTAINED BY THE |
|---|---|
| PETITIONER UNDER | THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. |
| EXT. P4 : | TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE |
REPRESENTATION DATED 6.10.2009 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE MANAGEMENT. |
|---|---|---|
| EXT. P5 : | TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE |
REPRESENTATION DATED 17.5.2010 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE MANAGEMENT. |
| EXT. P6 : | TRUE COPY OF THE WP(C)NO.30662 OF |
JUDGMENT DATED 6.10.2010 IN 2010 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT. |
| EXT. P7 : | TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO |
ORDER DATED 13.12.2010 ISSUED BY THE THE PETITIONERS. |
| EXT. P8 : | TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 25.11.2009 ESTABLISHMENT. |
PROCEEDINGS DATE CM(HR)/945 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT |
| EXT. P9 : | TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 13.4.2010 H |
MINUTES OF THE MEETING ELD BY THE RESPONDENT COMPANY. |
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
EXT.R1(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT DATED 13.4.2010 SIGNED UNDER SECTION 12(3) OF THE ID ACT.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
mbr/
P.V.ASHA, J.
W.P(C) No.347 of 2011-P
Dated this the 8th day of June, 2016
JUDGMENT
The petitioners, who are Assistant Officers (Fin.) Sub Layer, in the Finance Department of the 3rd respondent - M/s.Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. (FACT), filed this writ petition aggrieved by denial of promotion despite availability of 9 vacancies of Layer 1 Officer. They also point out that several of their juniors are placed above them.
2
W.P(C) No.347 of 2011-P
centralisation took place, the petitioners were compelled to work under those who are their juniors, who were actually enjoying higher positions because of the promotion prospects which were available in the other divisions in which they got appointments. The petitioners also refer to Ext.P9 minutes wherein the management as well as the Union had entered into an agreement in respect of the promotions.
3
W.P(C) No.347 of 2011-P
joined earlier in one division had to work under those who joined later in other divisions. The vacancies arising in each division were being filled up in accordance with the respective divisional settlements, promotion policies, etc, which governed them. At the time of centralisation, petitioners were continuing in the clerical cadre in the Udyogamandal Division. According to the resondents, petitioners who were working in Udyogamandal Division were not covered by Ext P1 approval. According to them, the conciliation settlement Ext R1(a) was arrived at under Section 12(3) of ID Act and signed on 13.4.2010, in the case of workmen.
4. Petitioners who were Senior Asistants in the workmen
cadre got promotion as Assistant Officers (finance) in Sub Layer in Managerial EO scale with effect from 2.4.2010. Clause 3.1 of Ext.R1(a) provides that promotion policies applicable to the respective categories in the divisions as contained in the divisional settlements would be modified as per the terms in the settlement Ext.R1(a). It is stated that the petitioners were also benefitted by Ext.R1(a) settlement and they got promotion as Assistant Officers (Finance) in Sub Layer. Pointing out this, the respondents stated that the petitioners are bound by Ext.R1(a)
4
W.P(C) No.347 of 2011-P
settlement and they cannot claim promotion on the ground that there are vacancies. It is stated that, there were no post of Assistant Officer (Finance) in Sub Layer as per the conciliation settlement in Udyogamandal division.
5
W.P(C) No.347 of 2011-P
stated that though the information pertaining to the number of officers retired was correct, those were not vacancies for filling. Petitioners who were in workmen category got promotion to Sub Layer in EO scale only on implementation of the conciliation settlement Ext R1(a).
“1.2. In order to consider cases of workmen in Finance who are not eligible for Assistant Officer (Finance) Sub layer as on the date of this settlement as they are not in the feeder category of Senior Assistant (Finance), but are senior to those getting movement as Assistant Officer (Finance) sub layer as
6
W.P(C) No.347 of 2011-P
per clause 1.1 above with respect to their date of posting as Accounts Clerk/Clerk (Finance), three posts of Assistant Officer (Finance Sub layer will be operated on a one time basis and they will be considered for promotion after completion of their probation of 6 months as Senior Assistants.”
The petitioners admit that they got promotion as Assistant Officer (Finance) Sub Layer on the basis of Exr R1(a) settlement which was to be operated as a one time measure. Ext.P1 was not applicable to the petitioners, who were at the relevant time in Workmen categories. When the promotion policy is covered by settlements and there is no provision for a further promotion under that, this Court cannot issue any direction to the respondents on the claims raised by the petitioners.
In these circumstances, the Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/- (P.V.ASHA, JUDGE)
rtr/
3 issues framed by the court
Whether promotion can be granted based on vacancies when a one-time settlement covers the promotion.
Whether Union court settlement signed under Section 12(3) of the ID Act is binding on the employees.
Whether Writ Court can direct promotion when promotion policy is governed by settlements.
N.P. MADHUSOODANAN AND OTHERS
CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S. FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS, TRAVANCORE LTD.
P.V. ASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
