Allowed

Saji P.K. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Jan 2021WP(C)/9481/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, office attendants, sought promotion to Lower Division Clerk citing Government Orders applicable to them. Court held that promotion cannot be claimed before Government concurrence and directed the Board to fill vacancies expeditiously upon concurrence granted on 29.05.2020.

What did the court decide?

The 2nd respondent directed to take immediate steps to fill up vacancies in terms of Government Orders Exts.P1 and P2 expeditiously as possible.

Saji P.K. Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 29TH POUSHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.9481 OF 2019(I)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 SAJI P.K., OFFICE ATTENDANT, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE, IDUKKI, THODUPUZHA-685 584.

¶8

2 BINU P, OFFICE ATTENDANT, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA-688 001.

¶9

3 RAJESH S, OFFICE ATTENDANT, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA-688 001.

¶10

4 SAJIMON T.K, OFFICE ATTENDANT, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE,IDUKKI,THODUPUZHA-685584

¶11

5 GEORGE KURIAKOSE, OFFICE ATTENDANT, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE, PALACE ROAD,THRISSUR-20

¶12

6 SHAJIMON P.S, OFFICE ATTENDANT, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE, PALACE ROAD, THRISSUR-20

¶13

7 MOHANDAS N.P, OFFICE ATTENDANT, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE,CHEROOTTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE P.O.KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE-673 032.

¶14

8 SUKUMARAN T, OFFICE ATTENDANT, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE,CHEROOTTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE P.O.KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE-673 032.

¶15

BY ADVS. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ SRI.VARUN C.VIJAY KUM.A.ARUNA KUM.THULASI K. RAJ SMT.RIYA RAYMOL IYPE

¶16

WPC 9481/19

¶17

¶18

SMT.MAITREYI SACHIDANANDA HEGDE

¶19

RESPONDENTS:

¶20

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2 KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, GRAMA SOUBHAGYA, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035

¶21

3 THE SECRETARY, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, GRAMA SOUBHAGYA, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035

¶22

R2-3 BY ADV. N.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD SRI. SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE - GP

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 9481/19

JUDGMENT

The petitioners have approached this Court

¶28

impugning Ext.P10 order issued by the 2 nd respondent-Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board, wherein, they have been notified that the Government Orders - produced as Exts.P1 and P2 - are not applicable to them; and that, therefore, the request for promoting them to the post of Lower Division Clerk is not tenable.

¶29

2. The petitioners say that Exts.P1 and P2 Orders are applicable to the 2 nd respondentBoard also and therefore, pray that respondents 1 to 3 be directed to promote them to the post of LD Clerk with effect from 18.09.2018; or in the alternative, to direct the 1 st respondentState of Kerala to grant concurrence to extend the benefits of Exts.P1 and P2 to the employees of the Board with effect from 03.01.2014.

¶30

3. In response, the learned Government

¶31

¶32

WPC 9481/19

¶33

Pleader – Sri.Sunil Kumar Kuriakose, submitted that it may not be necessary for this Court to consider the merits of the contentions in this Writ Petition any further because, through an order dated 29.05.2020 – a copy of which has been produced along with memo dated 20.11.2020 – the Government has granted concurrence for grant of benefits under Exts.P1 and P2 Orders

¶34

to the 2 nd respondent-Board also. He,

¶35

therefore, prayed that this Writ Petition be closed on such terms.

¶36

4. Sri.N.Rajagopalan Nair – learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2 nd respondent-Board, submitted that since the Government has given concurrence with effect from 29.05.2020, his client may be allowed to

¶37

complete the process of promotion, after verifying the credentials of all the employees in its service, including the petitioners. He

¶38

submitted that the said process can be

¶39

WPC 9481/19

¶40

¶41

completed without any avoidable delay

¶42

hereinafter.

¶43

5. When I consider the afore submissions, it is without doubt that until the Government Order dated 29.05.2020 had been issued, Exts.P1

¶44

and P2 Orders cannot be construed to be applicable to the 2 nd respondent-Board.

¶45

Indubitably therefore, the petitioners cannot seek that they be promoted with effect from 18.09.2018 or that Exts.P1 and P2 orders be made applicable with effect from 03.01.2014, merely because it was recommended by the 2 nd respondent to the Government for such purpose.

¶46

6. I am, therefore, of the firm view that in view of the concurrence granted by the Government, the 2 nd respondent should take immediate steps to fill-up the vacancies in terms of Exts.P1 and P2 as expeditiously as is

¶47

possible. It is so ordered.

¶48

After I dictated this judgment, Sri.Varun

¶49

WPC 9481/19

¶50

¶51

C. Vijay – learned counsel for the petitioners,

¶52

prayed that liberty be allowed to his clients to approach the Government to have Exts.P1 and P2 orders applied to the 2 nd respondent from the year 2014. He submitted that he is seeking this liberty because, it is not clarified in the latest Government Order dated 29.05.2020 whether it applies from an anterior date or only prospectively.

¶53

Even though from a plain reading of the order dated 29.05.2020, I cannot find any ambiguity, I leave open the afore requested liberty to the petitioners to approach the Government, if they are desirous of seeking any clarification in this issue.

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

WPC 9481/19

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶62

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF GO(P) NO 1/2014/P & ARD DATED 3.1.2014
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF GO(P) NO 21/2014/P & ARD DATED 19.7.2004
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO KI/425/2018 DATED 4.8.2018
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD (CLASSIFICATION AND CONDITIONS OF RECRUITMENT OF STAFF) REGULATIONS 2006
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE AGENDA OF THE MEETING DATED 3.2.2014
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF GO(RT) NO 857/2014/LABOUR DATED 27.6.2014
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE RTI APPLICATION DATED 31.10.2018
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE RTI REPLY DATED 14.11.2018
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.9.2014 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY , KERALA KHADI BOARD.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.8.2015

Saji P.K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saji P.K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Haris K.M Vs State of Kerala

Hariharan K. Vs State of Kerala

Rajeev a.R., Vs State of Kerala

Dinesan M Vs the State of Kerala

C.T.Betty Vs State of Kerala

Ajith K. Thankachan Vs Chief Engineer (Hrd and General)