Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.NALINAKSHAN, AGED 49 YEARS versus STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.NALINAKSHAN, AGED 49 YEARS v. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS - WP(C) No. 12736 of 2007(N) [2007] RD-KL 9993 (11 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 12736 of 2007(N)

1. K.NALINAKSHAN, AGED 49 YEARS,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent

2. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, P & ARD DEPARTMENT,

3. COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE,

4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

For Petitioner :SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR

Dated :11/06/2007

O R D E R

K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J.

W.P.(C) No.12736 of 2007-N

Dated this the 11th day of June, 2007.



J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has approached this Court, challenging Ext.P15 order, under which the promotion granted to him to the post of Upper Division Clerk has been modified. The brief facts of the case are the following: The petitioner joined the Land Revenue Department as Village Assistant on 2-2-1987. His probation was declared with effect from 2- 2-1989. Therefore, he was entitled to be promoted in the next arising vacancy, by virtue of the exemption from acquisition of test qualification available under Rule 13A (1) of the KS & SSR. But, he was not considered for promotion. He along with another approached this Court and this Court by Ext.P7 judgment directed to consider their claim. Pursuant to that direction, by Ext.P8 proceedings of the Government dated 14-7-2003, the petitioner was ordered to be promoted having regard to the temporary exemption under Rule 13 A (1) of the KS & SSR. In the light of the said order, the petitioner was promoted with effect from 5-9-2003. The petitioner claims retrospective promotion. This Court, by Ext.P14 judgment directed the WPC No. 12736 of 2007 2 Government to consider his claim. The Government, by Ext.P16 proceedings dated 5-1-2007 ordered to grant him notional promotion to the post of U.D. Clerk with effect from the date on which his immediate junior was promoted after the date of declaration of his probation, and subsequent temporary promotion to the higher posts, if any given to his junior within a period of three years. He cleared all the obligatory test only on 20-10-2004. Therefore, it was ordered that he maybe notionally reverted with effect from the date of initial notional promotion. In implementation of that order, the Land Revenue Commissioner has passed Ext.P15 order. As per that order, the petitioner who was notionally promoted with effect from 12-6- 1989 was reverted with effect from 11-6-1992. Thereafter, he was further promoted with effect from 20-10-2004, the date on which he cleared the test qualification. This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P15. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to get exemption all throughout and in support of that submission, a decision of this Court which is produced as Ext.P17 (4) is relied on. He also relies on Ext.P17 order passed in favour of one Smt.V.S.Ushakumari, by the Government on 26-6-2003.

2. Since the petitioner joined service only after 31-12-1985, he WPC No. 12736 of 2007 3 is not entitled to get exemption under Rule 13AA of the KS &SSR. The exemption available under Rule 13A (1) is a temporary exemption only for a period of three years. So, the petitioner was rightly promoted in 1989 and reverted, on completion of three years. Thereafter, he is rightly promoted, on acquiring qualification. Ext.P17 judgment has no application to the facts of this case as it was rendered on 6-3-1984. Obviously, the incumbent therein joined service before 31-12-1990. Ext.P17 order also will not help the petitioner as the petitioner is not entitled to get promotion beyond 1992 as he could not acquire the test qualification, within the temporary exemption period. In the result, the Writ Petition fails, and it is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,

JUDGE.

MS


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.