Review petitioner, aggrieved by regularisation of a junior employee's service, filed for review claiming seniority. Court found no grounds for review as regularisation order was unchallenged earlier and appeal is pending.
Review petition failed and dismissed.
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 MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
FRIDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1941
RP.No.865 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 6639/2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 6639/2018(D) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/S:
ANIL KUMAR AGED 55 YEARS TECHNICIAN, ANERT, LAW COLLEGE ROAD, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695033
BY ADV. SRI.K.G.PAVITHRAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 R.SURESH BABU TECHNICIAN, ANERT, THYCAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695014
3 THE DIRECTOR, AGENCY FOR NON CONVENTIONAL ENERGY AND RURAL TECHNOLOGY (ANERT), THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695014
OTHER PRESENT:
GP SRI. N.K. SUNIL NATH, SC ANERT T.R. HARIKUMAR
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
RP.No.865 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 6639/2018
2
O R D E R
This review petition is filed by a third party to this judgment claiming to be aggrieved by the directions contained in the judgment. The direction contained in the judgment was to grant the writ petitioner the benefit of regularisation in service with effect from 12.08.1995 and to refix petitioner's pay accordingly.
RP.No.865 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 6639/2018
3
petitioner had not challenged the order of regularisation. It was only with regard to date of effect of regularisation that the writ petition was filed.
I am of the opinion that no ground is raised justifying a review of the judgment. The review petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed.
SD/-
ANU SIVARAMAN
JUDGE
rmm
RP.No.865 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 6639/2018
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER NO. A.O.619/93/ADMN. DATED 05.04.1993.
ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A.O.1377/98/ADM.DT 18.7.1998.
ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2.08.2002, O.P.NO.8927/2002.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL
// TRUE COPY //
PA. TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a review petition can succeed where the review petitioner failed to challenge the regularisation order earlier and only contests the effective date.
Whether the pendency of a government appeal against the impugned judgment justifies allowing the current review petition.
Anil Kumar
Suresh Babu
State of Kerala
The Director, ANERT
Anu Sivaraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
