The High Court directed the Senior Joint Director of Technical Education to act within two months on college orders approving cadre change and promotion, affording the petitioners and college an opportunity of hearing.
Order directing the 2nd respondent to take up Exhibits P1 and P2, issue appropriate orders after hearing within two months.
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 DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 18624 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:
1 ARUN V DHARAN, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O VIDYADHARAN, VIDYA BHAVAN, KODUMON P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA - 691555., NOW WORKING AS DEMONSTRATOR (ELECTRICAL), SREE NARAYANA POLY TECHNIC COLLEGE, KOTTIYAM, KOLLAM – 691571.2 LALGI T R, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O RADHAKRISHNAN, THAYYIL VEEDU, ARYADU SOUTH, AVALUKUNNU, ALAPUZHA-688008, NOW WORKING AS WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR-ELECTRICAL SREE NARAYANA POLY TECHNIC COLLEGE, KOTTIYAM, KOLLAM – 691571.BY ADV ARUN BABU
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION 4TH FLOOR, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695001.2 THE SENIOR JOINT DIRECTOR (PS), DIRECTORATE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PADMAVILASAM ROAD, PAZHAVANGADI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695023.3 SREE NARAYANA POLY TECHNIC COLLEGE REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, KOTTIYAM P. O., KOLLAM – 691571.4 THE CHAIRMAN, GOVERNING BODY, SREE NARAYANA POLY TECHNIC COLLEGE, KOTTIYAM P. O., KOLLAM – 691571.BY ADVS.
SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
WPC 18624/22
JUDGMENT
The petitioners say that first among them was working as
a Workshop Inspector in the 3 rd respondent – ‘Sree Narayana
Poly Technic College’ and then accommodated to the post of Demonstrator (Electrical), through a cadre change; consequently, the second among them being promoted to the post of Workshop Inspector. They allege that, in spite of the fact that these actions were done validly by the College, as is evident from Exts.P1 and P2, respondents 1 and 2 are refusing to grant approval to the cadre change of the former, thus impeding the promotion of the 2 nd respondent, and delaying its approval unfairly.
2 . The petitioners, therefore, pray that respondents 1
and 2 be directed to approve the cadre change of the 1 st petitioner to the post of Demonstrator, adverting to Ext.P1 order; and approve the promotion of the 2 nd respondent in the
post of Workshop Inspector, as has been granted through Ext.P2 order.
3
WPC 18624/22
3 . Sri.Gopalakrishnan – learned counsel representing the
learned Standing Counsel for the College, submitted that
appointment of the 1 st petitioner was to a retirement vacancy in
the post of Demonstrator (Electrical) and that he was fully eligible to the cadre change, since it involved no change of scale of pay. He added that, therefore, the promotion of the 2 nd respondent to the post of Workshop Inspector, was also in order and thus supported Exts.P1 and P2.
4 . In response, however, the learned Government
Pleader – Smt.Parvathy K., submitted that the 2 nd respondent has been incapacitated from acting upon Exts.P1 and P2, since
certain clarifications are required from the Government. She submitted that the 2 nd respondent has already taken up the matter with the 1 st respondent; and that as soon as same is obtained, necessary action on the request of the petitioners will be taken and completed.
5 . Even when I hear the learned Government Pleader on the afore lines, the fact remains that the College had issued Exts.P1 and P2 in favour of the petitioners and the same has
4
WPC 18624/22
not been yet objected to by the competent Authority. It is also
conceded that said proposals are pending before the 2 nd respondent awaiting final orders.
6 . I am, therefore, of the firm view that the 2 nd
respondent will have to act upon Exts.P1 and P2 within a time
frame and that the petitioners cannot be allowed to wait ad
infinitum .
Resultantly, I order this Writ Petition and direct the 2 nd respondent – Senior Joint Director (PS), to take up Exts.P1 and P2 and issue appropriate orders thereon, after affording the petitioners, as also the College, an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Needless to say, all consequential benefits to the
petitioners, resultant to the afore exercise, shall flow to them immediately thereafter.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
RR
JUDGE
WPC 18624/22
5
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18624/2022
PETITIOExhibit |
NER EXHIP1 |
BITSTHE TRUE C2/POLY/730RESPONDENT |
OPY OF ORDER BEARING NODATED 06.09.2021 OF THE 4TH. |
|---|---|---|---|
Exhibit |
P2 |
THE TRUE C2/SNP/1137RESPONDENT |
OPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NODATED 22.09.2021 OF THE 4TH. |
Exhibit |
P3 |
THE TRUE C18/03/2022RESPONDENT |
OPY OF THE REQUEST DATEDSUBMITTED BY THE 3RDTO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
Exhibit |
P4 |
THE TRUE C05/04/2022RESPONDENTENCLOSINGPETITIONER |
OPY OF THE LETTER DATEDSUBMITTED BY THE 3RDBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTTHE REQUEST OF THE 1ST. |
Exhibit |
P5 |
THE TRUE C20/04/22 SRESPONDENT |
OPY OF THE REQUEST DATEDUBMITTED BY THE 3RDTO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
Exhibit |
P6 |
THE TRUE C18.05.2022THE 2ND RERESPONDENT |
OPY OF THE LETTER DATEDISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OFSPONDENT TO THE 3RD. |
Exhibit |
P7 |
THE TRUE C09.01.2022THE 2ND RE |
OPY OF THE REPLY DATEDSUBMITTED BY THE OFFICE OFSPONDENT TO ONE SHAAN. |
Exhibit |
P8 |
THE TRUE CTHE GO(MS)2020. |
OPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF76/2000/H.EDN DATED 31-05- |
Exhibit |
P9 |
THE TRUE C15/05/2022THE OFFICETECHNICAL |
OPY OF THE APPLICATION DATEDSUBMITTED BY AJIMON BEFOREOF THE DIRECTORATE OFEDUCATION |
Exhibit |
P10 |
THE TRUE CNUMBER RTI30/03/22 IDIRECTORAT |
OPY OF THE REPLY BEARING-1/10349/22/DTE DATEDSSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THEE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION. |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent Director of Technical Education is directed to act upon the college's orders approving cadre change and promotion.
Whether an inquiry or opportunity of hearing must be afforded within a specified time limit before passing orders on service proposals.
ARUN V DHARAN
LALGI T R
STATE OF KERALA
THE SENIOR JOINT DIRECTOR (PS) DTE
SREE NARAYANA POLY TECHNIC COLLEGE
THE CHAIRMAN, GOVERNING BODY, SREE NARAYANA POLY TECHNIC COLLEGE
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court