Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M.C. ANONTY, S/O. CHANDY versus THE STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M.C. ANONTY, S/O. CHANDY v. THE STATE OF KERALA - WP(C) No. 23761 of 2006(D) [2006] RD-KL 2409 (4 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 23761 of 2006(D)

1. M.C. ANONTY, S/O. CHANDY,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

2. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT

3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,

4. THE ASST. TRANSPORT OFFICER,

For Petitioner :SRI.JOICE GEORGE

For Respondent :SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C.

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

Dated :04/12/2006

O R D E R

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J.

W.P.(C)NO.23761 of 2006 Dated this 4th day of December, 2006

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, a driver of the KSRTC, was assigned with light duties on the ground that he is having very serious cardiac ailments. His grievance is that the KSRTC is not presently assigning light duties to him and is now compelling him either to go on for driver's duty itself or to go on leave entailing loss of pay. Going by the counter affidavit submitted by the KSRTC the maximum periods during which light duties could be assigned as per the guidelines issued by the KSRTC have been given to the petitioner.

2. Heard Sri.Joice George, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri.K.Prabhakaran, the learned Standing Counsel for the KSRTC. Sri.Joice George submits that in spite of the guidelines several other similarly circumstanced persons are being assigned with light duties even beyond the maximum periods allowed by the guidelines.

3. I do not propose to take a decision on this controversy. WPC No.23761/2006 2 Ext.P5 representation submitted by the petitioner will be taken up by the respondent. The petitioner will be permitted to cite the instances where, in spite of the guidelines light duties are assigned to similarly circumstanced persons, and on the basis of such instances and the further points, which will be highlighted during hearing by the petitioner, the respondent will take a correct and just decision on Ext.P5. In view of the averments in the counter affidavit, if the Corporation finds it difficult to assign light duties to the petitioner any longer, the petitioner may be permitted to make a request for voluntarily retirement also and in such contingency, the said request also will be considered by the Corporation. The writ petition is disposed of as above. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE Judge dpk


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.