Dismissed

Dr.Anoop Balan v. the Director and Hod Centre for Marine Living Resource & Ecology

Kerala HC11 Apr 2018OP (CAT)/66/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ jurisdiction original petition challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal's dismissal of an OA filed by a project scientist who alleged termination of service. The High Court held that the impugned order was not a termination but a communication that his fixed-term appointment had expired and no further extension would be granted. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the peti

What the court decided

AI extract

Dr.Anoop Balan Vs the Director and Hod… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN &

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANNIE JOHN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 21ST CHAITHRA, 1940

¶5

OP (CAT).No. 66 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 659/2016 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/APPLICANT

¶8

DR.ANOOP BALAN PROJECT SCIENTIST -C, CENTRE FOR MARINE LIVING RESOURCE & ECOLOGY, 6TH FLOOR, C-BLOCK, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KOCHI - 682 037.

¶9

BY ADV.SRI.M.R.SARIN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT:

¶11

1. THE DIRECTOR AND HOD CENTRE FOR MARINE LIVING RESOURCE &

¶12

ECOLOGY, C-BLOCK, 6TH FLOOR, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, P.B NO.5415,

¶13

CSEZ PO, KOCHI - 682 037.

¶14

2. THE UNDER SECRETARY & HOD

¶15

CENTRE FOR MARINE LIVING RESOURCE & ECOLOGY

¶16

C-BLOCK, 6TH FLOOR, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, P.B NO.5415,

¶17

CSEZ PO, KOCHI - 682 037.

¶18

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-04-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

kkj

¶20

OP (CAT).No. 66 of 2018 (Z)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶23

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO 659/16 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL. EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.A NO. 659/16 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL.

¶24

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

NIL

// TRUE COPY //

PA TO JUDGE

K.SURENDRA MOHAN & ANNIE JOHN, JJ.

¶29

O.P.(CAT) No. 66 of 2018

¶30

Dated this the 11^th day of April, 2018

¶31

J U D G M E N T

¶32

Surendra Mohan, J.

¶33

The petitioner is before us challenging the order dated 05.07.2017 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench (CAT for short) in O.A.No.180/000659/2016. The petitioner who was working as a Project Scientist at the Centre for Marine Living Resource and Ecology (CMLRE for short) is alleged to have been terminated from service as per Annexure A3 proceedings dated 28.10.2015. The petitioner had approached the CAT challenging annexure - A3. By the impugned order, the CAT has dismissed the Original Application.

¶34

The petitioner had applied for appointment as a Project Scientist-C. His application was considered, an interview was conducted and he was appointed as per annexure - A1 proceedings dated 14.12.2012 of the Head of the Department of CMLRE. The appointment was initially

¶35

-:2:-

¶36

O.P.(KAT) No. 66 of 218

¶37

for a period of two years with a provision for extension of the term. Accordingly, the petitioner's term was extended. As per annexure - A3, he has been informed that no further extension would be granted.

¶38

According to Advocate M.R.Sarin Panicker who appears for the petitioner, his extension has been recommended by the Committee. Therefore, it is contended that his termination is unsustainable and liable to be interfered with. The CAT has without considering the relevant aspects of the case dismissed the Original Application. Therefore, the counsel seeks interference with the impugned order.

¶39

Heard. A perusal of annexure - A1 shows that the petitioner was not a regular employee of the CMLRE. He was appointed initially for a period of two years. The relevant portion of Annexure - A1 is extracted hereunder for convenience of reference.

¶40

The appointment is initially for the period of 2 years, beyond which further extensions up to 31.03.2017 will

¶41

-:3:-

¶42

O.P.(KAT) No. 66 of 218

¶43

considered on the basis of your performance.

¶44

As per the above term, though his appointment was initially for a period two years, the same could be extended up to 31.03.2017. He has admittedly worked for the entire period that is stipulated by annexure - A1. Annexure - A3 shows that, the CMLRE has decided not to grant any further extension to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has not been terminated from service as alleged. The term of his appointment has already expired and what has been declined is grant of further extension. The said decision cannot be found fault with in the facts and circumstances of this case.

¶45

According to the counsel for the petitioner, going by the terms of annexure - A1, it was necessary that one month's notice was given to him before his termination. However, we are not satisfied that, the said contention is correct, for more reasons than one. In the first place, as we have already found above, annexure - A3 is not a termination order of his service but, a communication that

¶46

-:4:-

¶47

O.P.(KAT) No. 66 of 218

¶48

no further extension of service could be granted to him. Secondly, the stipulation regarding one month's notice is applicable only during the project period, as evident from annexure - A1. The project period has already expired and the petitioner was admittedly continuing on the basis of the extension granted to him.

¶49

The above being the factual scenario, we find no grounds to entertain this Original Petition or to grant any of the reliefs sought for. This Original Petition is therefore dismissed.

¶50

Sd/-

¶51

K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE

¶52

Sd/- ANNIE JOHN JUDGE

¶53

kkj

Dr.Anoop Balan v. the Director and Hod Centre for Marine Living Resource & Ecology

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Dr.Anoop Balan v. the Director and Hod Centre for Marine Living Resource & Ecology

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kavitha D.K Vs the Secretary

Manoj K.S Vs State of Kerala

Sini Joseph Vs State of Kerala

P.K. Devaraj Vs Union of India

Fausia Hassan Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Srikrishna Aggithaya K