Allowed

Mohammed Ali.K., v. University of Calicut

Kerala HC24 Jun 2019WP(C)/4921/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition where electricians were denied promotion as Senior Electricians due to the post's omission in a pay revision order. Relying on antecedent judgments holding that statutory promotion posts cannot be extinguished without ordinance amendment, the Court directed the University to grant promotions.

What did the court decide?

Directed the University to grant promotions to petitioners as Senior Electricians in accordance with eligibility and seniority within one month.

Mohammed Ali.K., Vs University of Calicut — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.4921 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 MOHAMMAD ALI.K., AGED 50 YEARS ELECTRICIAN, ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

2 UNNIKRISHNAN.P.V. AGED 40 YEARS ELECTRICIAN, ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 673 635

¶12

2 THE VICE CHANCELLOR UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 673 635

¶13

3 REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 673 635

¶14

4 THE SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VICE-CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶15

BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UNIVERSITY

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No.4921 of 2019

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioners, who are working as Electricians in the University, are aggrieved by the denial of promotion as Senior Electrician. Petitioners' promotion is denied as per Exhibits P4 and P5 on the ground that the post is omitted from 10^th pay revision as per GO(P) No.10/16/Fin. dated 21.02.2010. It is also stated that the post was restricted to the then working incumbents.

¶21

Respondents have filed a counter affidavit stating that they

¶22

can act only in accordance with the pay revision orders since financial commitment is involved.

¶23

I have already considered identical issue with respect to the promotion to the post of Senior Electrician itself in the judgment dated 10.04.2017 in W.P.(c) No.33156 of 2016 in which I have found that there is no amendment to the Calicut University Ordinance 1978 and the post of Senior Electrician continues to be a promotion post for the Electricians, in the light of various judgments of this Court in which this Court upheld that promotions cannot be denied to the posts covered by statues/ordinance/decisions of the syndicate except after amendment of statues/ordinance. Exhibit P6 judgment in W.P.(c) Nos.33136 of 2016 and 32890 of 2016 was rendered directing grant of promotion to the petitioners therein as Senior Electricians in the light of the judgments in

¶24

WP(C).No.4921 of 2019

¶25

¶26

W.P.(c) No. 9276 of 2013 which was upheld in the judgment in Writ Appeal. In the light of Exhibit P6 judgment produced by the petitioner in the case of similarly situated persons, this writ petition is also liable to be allowed. In the counter affidavit filed in this Writ Petition also, the respondents do not say that statues/ordinance have been amended taking away the post of Senior Electrician.

¶27

Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the University to grant promotions to the petitioners as Senior Electrician in accordance with their eligibility and seniority within a period of one month form the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶28

Sd/P.V.ASHA JUDGE

¶29

SCS

¶30

WP(C).No.4921 of 2019

¶31

¶32

APPENDIX

¶33

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶34

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF APPOINTMENT ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 18/10/2012. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER SHOWING THE PROMOTION OF THE PETITIONERS 1 AND 2 AS ELECTRICIAN. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 17/10/2012. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER, DATED 28/1/2019. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 28/1/2019. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.33136/16. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.17886/17.

¶35

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Mohammed Ali.K., v. University of Calicut

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Ali.K., v. University of Calicut

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kerala Private Primary Headmaster'S Association, Vs State of Kerala

Sindhu.P Vs the State of Kerala

The Manager Vs the State of Kerala

Baby George Vs Dr.a.Kowsigan I.A.S.

Prasad K.B. Vs the Registrar

I.Shyjumon, Vs Ibrahim Rawther