The Tribunal dismissed the petitioner's petition challenging a lower Tribunal's rejection of her promotion claim due to late filing and lack of representation, though it acknowledged the lower Tribunal failed to communicate the dismissal order to her.
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
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941
OP(KAT).No.391 OF 2019
PETITIONER/APPLICANTS:
A.S. GRACEAMMA AGED 68 YEARS W/O. T.V.PAUL, RETIRED SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT, THANTHALAKATTU HOUSE, PERUMBAVOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM, KERALA-683 542.
BY ADVS. SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH SRI.ACHUTH KYLAS SRI.R.MAHESH MENON SRI.DEAGO JOHN K SHRI.AMAL DEV C.V.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695 001.
3 THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) KERALA , M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001, KERALA
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.GP SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH
THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(KAT).No.391 OF 2019
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19th day of December 2019
K. Vinod Chandran, J.
This original petition is filed against an order of the Tribunal which dismissed the Transferred Application as infructuous recording the submission of the Government that all pensionary benefits have been sanctioned to the applicant. In fact, the petitioner and counsel were not present on the day when the matter was disposed of. Though the order was passed on 17.11.2015, the original petition is filed in the year 2019. The delay is the preliminary objection raised by the Government.
10.12.2019 which is extracted hereunder:
“The learned Counsel for the petitioner has pointed out to us Rule 20 of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (Practice and Procedure) Rules, 2010 which is as hereunder:-
“20. Communication of orders to parties:- (1) Every order including interim order and the final order shall be communicated to the applicant and to the respondent either in person or by registered post free of cost
(2) If the applicant or the respondent to any proceeding requires a copy of the document or proceeding, the same shall be supplied to him on
OP(KAT).No.391 OF 2019
3
such terms and conditions and on payment of such fee as may be fixed by the Chairman by general or special order”
The specific contention taken is that the order was never communicated to the petitioner herein who was the applicant before the Tribunal. In such circumstances, we direct the Registrar (Subordinate Judiciary) to get instructions from the Registrar of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal as to whether the impugned order passed in T.A No.2080 of 2012 dated 17.11.2015 was communicated to the applicant before the certified copy was issued on the basis of the application made by the Counsel. The said information shall be placed before us within one week from today.”
Kerala Administrative Tribunal dated 17.12.2019, in which, it has been admitted that in the present case the order was not communicated to the applicant. In such circumstances, we do not find any reason to non-suit the petitioner for reason of the delay occasioned. However, we are of the opinion that considering the long pendency of the matter, we ourselves can look at the prayers made by the petitioner.
4
OP(KAT).No.391 OF 2019
OP(KAT).No.391 OF 2019
5
the judicial forum against denial of promotion also stands against the petitioner. We, hence, find no reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal and we reject the original petition for the reasons stated by us herein.
There is no order as to costs.
SD/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
JUDGE
SD/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
SHG
OP(KAT).No.391 OF 2019
6
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF T.A.NO.2080 OF 2012. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)1 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE NO LIABILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST DATED 29.8.2006. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)2 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE NO LIABILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST DATED 5.10.2006. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)3 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE NO LIABILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER DATED 20.10.2006. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)4 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE NO LIABILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST DATED 26.10.2006. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)5 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE NO LIABILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER DATED 28.10.2006. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)6 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 26.6.2006 OF THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT SHOWING THAT THE D.C.R.G NOMINATION WAS AGAIN FORWARDED TO 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)7 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 11.7.2006. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)8 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D3/15972/06 DATED 26.8.2006. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)9 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ALONG WITH ENCLOSURES SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 4.11.2006. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)10 | THE TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 5.1.2007 OF THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, THRISSUR ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT REQUESTING FOR COPY OF THE FBS OPTION AND NOMINATION OF THE PETITIONER. |
| EXHIBIT P-1(TA)11 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.1.2007 |
OP(KAT).No.391 OF 2019
7
OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
| EXHIBIT P2 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WPC NO.8460 OF 2019 DATED 14.3.2007. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2(A) | THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.F1-12944/2006 DATED 9.7.2007 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P3 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN T.A.NO.2080 OF 2012 DATED 17.11.2015. |
| EXHIBIT P4 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER DATED 21.8.2019. |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner who filed a late petition challenging denial of promotion should be non-suited for delay or delay in communication of Tribunal order.
Whether the claim for promotion based on unsatisfactory Annual Confidential Reports is maintainable after long delay.
A.S. GRACEAMMA
STATE OF KERALA
CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
ACCOUNTANT GENERAL
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
V.G.ARUN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
