Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE versus G.DHANARAJ, AGED 47 YEARS

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE v. G.DHANARAJ, AGED 47 YEARS - OP No. 519 of 2002(S) [2007] RD-KL 9947 (8 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 519 of 2002(S)

1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Petitioner

2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY,

3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAYS MANAGER,

4. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER,

Vs

1. G.DHANARAJ, AGED 47 YEARS,
... Respondent

2. V.GUNASEELAN, AGED 42 YEARS,

3. K.K.NATARAJAN, AGED 42 YEARS,

For Petitioner :SRIALEXANDER THOMAS SC RLYS

For Respondent :SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

Dated :08/06/2007

O R D E R

K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & ANTONY DOMINIC, JJ.


===============================
O.P. NO. 519 OF 2002
======================

Dated this the 8th day of June, 2007



J U D G M E N T

Radhakrishnan, J.

Challenge is against the order passed by the Tribunal in O.A.140/99. An application was preferred by the respondents herein before the Tribunal for a declaration that they are entitled to be considered for promotion against vacancies of Diesel Mechanical Technicians Grade III which existed prior to 31/8/98 and a declaration was also sought that the additional posts created in terms of para 2 of Annexure A3 are to be filled up based on seniority cum suitability from among the Khalasis in the feeder category and that the respondents are entitled for promotion as Diesel Mechanical Technician Grade III in preference to the juniors and also for other consequential reliefs.

2. The Tribunal declared that the applicants are entitled to be considered for promotion against the vacancies prior to 31/8/98 and a direction was given to the Department to promote them against which this OP has been preferred. Before the Tribunal the respondents submitted that as per OP 519/2002 : 2 : rules 50% of the vacancies are to be filled up by promotion, 25% by direct recruitment and the balance 25% by Departmental Competitive Examination. It is stated before the Tribunal that the vacancies which existed prior to 31/8/98 were filled up, 9 from open market and 19 through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination against the 28 vacancies. Further, it is also stated that the applicants were not qualified to be promoted on the strength of the letter dated 25/4/95 by the Chief Personnel Officer. Applicants submitted that Chief Personnel Officer has no power to issue a letter as per rules and they are fully qualified for promotion to 50% quota as found by the Tribunal. We notice that the applicants were promoted in 2000 and they are now holding the post. Hence we find no reason to disturb their continuance in the promotion post. Tribunal has stated cogent reasons. We therefore find no illegality or infirmity in the order passed in OA 140/99. Original petition lacks merits. Dismissed.

K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE.

Rp


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.