High Court of Kerala
Case Law Search
RAJEEV.P.B. v. STATE OF KERALA - WP(C) No. 26054 of 2005(B)  RD-KL 16436 (23 August 2007)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMWP(C) No. 26054 of 2005(B)
1. STATE OF KERALA,
2. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF KERALA,
For Petitioner :SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS
For Respondent :SRI.KRB.KAIMAL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC,J.W.P ( C) Nos. 26054, 29062 & 27639 of 2005
Dated this the 9th day of August, 2007
J U D G M E N T
The prayer in these writ petitions is to declare that the respondents are bound to make promotions of Last Grade Servants (Peons) to the post of Typist Gr.II pursuant to Exhibit P5 on the basis of the qualifications as laid down in the Kerala Secretariat Subordinate Service Special Rules. The petitioners are last grade Servants aspiring for promotion to the post of Typists Gr.II. Government Order dated 8.12.2004 Computer Word processing has been prescribed as an essential qualification for the posts of Typist in Public Service appointments. It is the complaint of the petitioners that before they could acquire the additional qualification as laid down in Exhibit -P2, recruitment process was initiated by notification dated 12.7.2005 It is in the aforesaid background that writ petitions have been filed. At the stage of admission this Court interim orders were passed to consider the case of the petitioners. But thereafter, the order was modified directing W.P ( C) No. 26054 of 2005 & conn. cases 2 that vacancies shall not be filled up except with the permission of this court. The aforesaid interim order was thereafter modified by order dated 23.2.2006. Against the interim order though an appeal was filed that was dismissed and the dismissal was confirmed by the Apex Court by dismissing S.L.P. No. 6950 of 2006 dated 28.4.2006.
2. When the cases came up for orders before this court, counsel for the petitioner sought for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the representations filed by them.
3. I have heard the counsel on both sides. The request of the petitioner is not opposed by the learned Government Pleader also. In the aforesaid situation, I dispose of this writ petition directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the representations filed by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. As already noted, by virtue of the interim order, this court had prevented the filling up of the vacancies notified and the said order will continue until orders are passed as above. Before orders are passed all parties W.P ( C) No. 26054 of 2005 & conn. cases 3 shall be given notice and an opportunity of hearing. I make it clear that I have not considered the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner and these contentions are left open.
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)ma W.P ( C) No. 26054 of 2005 & conn. cases 4
K.THANKAPPAN,JCRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999
ORDER25th May, 2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.