Disposed

Joshy Chiramal v. the Kerala State Financial Enterprises

Kerala HC16 Dec 2016WP(C)/8321/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners with MBA qualifications sought direction to promote them via modified rules despite existing qualifications for direct recruitment requiring professional degrees. The court directed the respondent to consider their representation within two months.

What did the court decide?

Respondent to consider the petitioners' representation within two months of receipt of this judgment.

Joshy Chiramal Vs the Kerala State Financial… — 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

FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 8321 of 2016 (M) ---------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. JOSHY CHIRAMAL, SENIOR MANAGER(RR), KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, HEAD OFFICE, THRISSUR.

¶8

2. MATHEW.N.J., SENIOR MANAGER, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, KOILANDY MAIN BRANCH, KOILANDY.

¶9

3. BAIJU.P.M., JUNIOR MANAGER, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, ALOOR BRANCH, CHALAKKUDY.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.) SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.(KSFE), REGISTERED OFFICE, BADRATHA, THRISSUR-680 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶13

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.UNNI NAIR

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

MLG

¶16

WP(C).No. 8321 of 2016 (M)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

EXT.P1: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE APPENDIX-I STATEMENT SHOWING THE CADRE, MODE OR APPOINTMENT AND QUALIFICATION FOR THE VARIOUS POSTS (AS ON 31.03.1991).

¶20

EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22.2.2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE RESPONDENT.

¶21

EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE PLANNING CELL SUB COMMITTEE PURSUANT TO THE MEETING HELD ON 23.3.2005.

¶22

EXT.P4: COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 358TH MEETING OF BOARD DIRECTORS OF THE RESPONDENT HELD ON 06.05.2006.

¶23

EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30.01.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.

¶24

EXT.P6: COPY OF THE LIST SHOWING THE 12 NUMBERS OF MANAGERS WITH MBA QUALIFICATION.

¶25

EXT.P7: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN THE HINDU DAILY DATED 20.06.2015.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S TO JUDGE

MLG

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶31

----------------------------------------------W.P(C).No. 8321 of 2016

¶32

----------------------------------------------Dated this the 16^th December, 2016

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

This writ petition is filed seeking directions to the respondent to fill up the posts of Senior Manager and Assistant Manager in the respondent by appointing persons possessing professional qualifications like CA, ICWA or MBA. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that Exhibit P1 provides for the above professional qualifications for direct recruitment to the post of Senior Manager and above. Even for the post of Junior Manager, the qualification for direct recruitment is Second Class Master's Degree in Commerce with Banking or Advanced Accountancy or its equivalent. The qualification prescribed for the post of Senior Manager by direct recruitment is a degree of a recognised University. It is further provided that the candidate should be a Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant or possess a Post Graduate Degree or its equivalent in Business Administration. However, it is stated that for promotion to the post, SSLC with three years service is prescribed as the qualification.

¶35

¶36

WP(C).8321/16

¶37

The petitioners are persons who have the qualification of MBA or its equivalent. They contend that they are entitled to be considered for promotion by making a suitable modification in the Rules for providing preference to those in service of the respondent who have acquired the said qualifications which have been prescribed for direct recruitment. The petitioner also contends that the Board of the respondent has, by resolution dated 6.5.2006, already taken a decision to consider such persons for appointment against 25% of the vacancies set apart for direct recruitment. However, this is not given effect to. Highlighting the grievances, the petitioners have preferred Exhibit P5 representation before the Managing Director of the respondent.

¶38

In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the Managing Director of the respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on Exhibit P5 representation with notice to the petitioners and after hearing them within a period of two months

¶39

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶40

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶41

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶42

vgs19/12

Joshy Chiramal v. the Kerala State Financial Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joshy Chiramal v. the Kerala State Financial Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Ramakrishnan Vs Public Service Commission

Sreevidya S. Vs the Director Handlooms, Kerala State Hnadloom Dev.Corporation Ltd.

Jishnu.J. Vs Institute of Banking Personnel Selection

D.Vishnu Nampoothiri Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Shijulal B.R. Vs State of Kerala

Beena Varghese Vs the State of Kerala