In a writ petition seeking promotion as U.D. Clerk, the High Court of Kerala held that since qualified and willing candidates existed, the claim could not succeed under the relevant service rules. The court found factual findings could not be interfered with and dismissed the petition.
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 K.VINOD CHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/8TH CHAITHRA, 1938
WP(C).No. 7808 of 2005 (R)
PETITIONER:
RAMESHKUMAR.K.
U.D. CLERK, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF 1ST CLASS WADAKKANCHERRY.
BY ADV. SRI.P.BHASKARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THRISSUR.
2. THE REGISTRAR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM.
3. P.SIVADASAN, U.D.CLERK CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASREE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 7808 of 2005 (R)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :-
| EXT.P1 | - | COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.03.2002 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. |
|---|---|---|
| EXT.P2 | - | COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.04.2002 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. |
| EXT.P3 | - | COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION DATED 19.06.2002 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXT.P4 | - | COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.10.2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
sp
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
----------------------------------
W.P(C). No.7808 of 2005-R
---------------------------------Dated this the 28th day of March, 2016
JUDGMENT
The petitioner in the above writ petition sought for promotion as U.D. Clerk with effect from 01.01.2002, the date on which a vacancy arose in the Criminal Judicial Department, Thrissur.
W.P.(C) No.7808 of 2005-R
2
have been considered only in the absence of qualified and willing candidates from the category of U.D. Typist. One P.Sivadasan, who entered service as L.D. Typist on 26.11.1993, was promoted as U.D. Typist on 16.08.2001. He had passed the test required for appointment as U.D. Clerk in January, 1995 and had also completed two years of service. He was the senior most U.D. Typist willing and qualified to be appointed as U.D. Clerk on 01.01.2002 ie: the date of occurrence of vacancy. He also applied for appointment as U.D. Clerk on 21.01.2002 in response to the willingness called for. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, appointed P. Sivadasan as U.D. Clerk which is in accordance with the rules. The said findings
W.P.(C) No.7808 of 2005-R
3
on facts cannot be interfered with.
The writ petition would stand dismissed. No
costs.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN,
JUDGE.
//True Copy//
P.A. to Judge.
sp/29/03/16
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Courts finding that qualified candidates existed precluded the petitioner from promotion and warranted dismissing the writ petition.
Whether the appointment of another officer as U.D. Clerk in accordance with rules was outside judicial interference.
RAMESHKUMAR.K.
THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THRISSUR
THE REGISTRAR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM
P.SIVADASAN
K. VINOD CHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
