This single-bench High Court of Kerala judgment dismissed a writ petition for promotion and posting relief as withdrawn by the petitioner, reserving his right to file a fresh petition for the specific promotion declaration.
The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to move afresh for the reserved relief.
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 ANIL K.NARENDRAN
THURSDAY,THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WP(C).No. 25104 of 2018
PETITIONER:
PRASANNAKUMAR K.V., AGED 47 YEARS, S/O K.V. VASUDEVAN PILLAI, JUNIOR CLERK, THE MARINE PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MPEDA HOUSE,PANAMPILLY AVENUE, KOCHI-682036, RESIDING AT G3, HILL VIEW APARTMENT, N.G.O. QUARTERS, THRIKKAKARA (P.O), COCHIN-682021
BY ADVS.SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.K.R.GANESH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, UDYOG BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110107.
2 THE MARINE PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANAMPILLY AVENUE, KOCHI-682036.
3 THE CHAIRMAN, THE MARINE PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANAMPILLY AVENUE, KOCHI-682036.
4 M.M. SARITHA, SR. CLERK, THE MARINE PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANAMPILLY AVENUE, KOCHI-682036.
WP(C).No. 25104 of 2018
-2-
5 J.R.CHITHRA, SR. CLERK, THE MARINE PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANAMPILLY AVENUE, KOCHI-682036.
6 DEEPTI CLEETUS, SR. CLERK, THE MARINE PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANAMPILLY AVENUE, KOCHI-682036.
BY ADVS. SMT.MINI GOPINATH, CGC ANTONY MUKKATH K.RADHAMANI AMMA SMT.MINI GOPINATH CGC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 25104 of 2018
-3-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is working as Junior Clerk in the 2nd
respondent MPEDA, has filed this writ petition, seeking the following reliefs;
“i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the records leading to Ext.P11 order and quash the same;
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to allow the petitioner to continue at the Regional Divisional Office of the 2nd respondent at Kochi;
iii) To declare that the petitioner is entitled to get promotion to the category of Senior Clerk with effect from 17.6.2015 with all consequential benefits including arrears of salary;
iv) To declare that Ext.P11 order is vitiated by malafides, malice in law and is the result of colorable exercise of power by the 3rd respondent”
for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file. The learned Central Government Counsel took notice for the 1st respondent. The learned Standing Counsel took notice for respondents 2 and 3. Urgent notice by speed post was ordered to respondents 4 to 7, returnable within three
WP(C).No. 25104 of 2018
-4-
weeks.
I.A.No.1 of 2018 reads thus;
“3. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner had again moved the respondents requesting to give the petitioner a posting back to Ernakulam considering his medical conditions. The Chairman, the 3rd respondent sent a reply to the petitioner to the representation referred to above by E-mail that since the writ petition is pending, the respondent is not in a position to consider the request of the petitioner for a transfer back to Ernakulam and it was also stated that if the writ petition is withdrawn, the respondents shall consider the question of giving a transfer to the petitioner back to Ernakulam. A true copy of the E-mail is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit P-14.
In the light of the above, the petitioner seeks leave of this Hon'ble Court to withdraw the above writ petition with liberty to move afresh.”
submit that, leaving open the 3rd relief sought for in this writ petition, i.e., a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to get promotion to the category of Senior Clerk with effect
WP(C).No. 25104 of 2018
-5-
from 17.06.2015 with all consequential benefits including arrears of salary, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition.
In such circumstances, considering the averments in the affidavit accompanying to I.A.No.1 of 2018 and also the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, reserving the aforesaid right of the petitioner.
Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE
bpr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition reserving the right to move for promotion relief later.
PRASANNAKUMAR K.V.
THE UNION OF INDIA
THE MARINE PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
THE CHAIRMAN, THE MARINE PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
M.M. SARITHA
J.R. CHITHRA
ANIL K.NARENDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
