Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.T. SAIDALAVI, AGED 44 YEARS versus THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.T. SAIDALAVI, AGED 44 YEARS v. THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY - WP(C) No. 27902 of 2007(V) [2007] RD-KL 17608 (20 September 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 27902 of 2007(V)

1. K.T. SAIDALAVI, AGED 44 YEARS,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.M.R.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

Dated :20/09/2007

O R D E R

V.GIRI, J.

W.P.(C).No.27902 of 2007 V

Dated this the 20th day of September, 2007.



JUDGMENT

The petitioner was appointed as a pump operator in the Water Authority, on a provisional basis, as per Ext.P1 order dated 8.7.1997. According to him, though his initial appointment was for a period of 179 days, he was allowed to continue beyond that period and thus he worked for 968 days as on 30.3.1990. He submitted Ext.P2 application for leave without allowance for 64 days on medical grounds and yet another application for leave without allowance on medical grounds. According to him, leave was not sanctioned unjustifiably. The petitioner's services were terminated with effect from 17.5.1990, as per Ext.P3 order, which reads as follows:

"I hereby ordered (sick) that the provisional service in respect of Sri.K.T.Saidalavi, Operator attached to P.H.Section, Kottakkal is terminated with effect from 17.5.90 FN due to the unauthorised absence from duty with effect from 17.5.90 FN"

2. Apparently, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 and proceeded to take up employment abroad. He claims that he W.P.(C).No.27902 of 2007 has come back. He is aged 54 years. He submitted Ext.P4 representation in that behalf before the respondent. Ext.P4 does not bear a date on the postal slip attached to Ext.P4 bears a date 28.6.2007. The petitioner refers to a case of reinstatement of certain CLR workers in the year 1997 and claims parity of treatment. No further details are furnished in the writ petition. I am of the view that the petitioner cannot be permitted to challenge Ext.P3 or seek a benefit which was denied a decade back. Even the alleged reinstatement of certain CLR workers, going by the version of the petitioner, seems to have taken place in the year 1997. It seems that the petitioner was working abroad during that period. Writ petition is misconceived and the same is dismissed. Sd/- (V.GIRI)

JUDGE

sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge


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.