Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

P.Raveendranath vs Stateof Kerala on 9 November, 2011

Author: Antony Dominic

Bench: Antony Dominic

       

  

   

 
 
                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM

                                                     PRESENT:

                         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
                                                            &
                          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

              WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/14TH SRAVANA, 1937

                              WA.No. 1008 of 2012 () IN WP(C).12140/2011
                                       --------------------------------------------
  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 12140/2011 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA
                                                DATED 09-11-2011

APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:
------------------------------------------

            P.RAVEENDRANATH
            POOKUTH HOUSE, PERIMBADARI, P.O.MANNARKAD
            PALAKKAD DISTRICT
            NOW WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE/DRIVER
            CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE
            REGIONAL TRAINING CENTRE, BARWAHA
            DARIYAMAHAL (POST OFFICE), KHARGONE DISTRICT
            MADHYA PRADESH-451 115. REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY
            HOLDER V.V.VANAJA, W/O.P.RAVEENDRANATH
            POOKUTH HOUSE, PERIMBADARI, P.O.MANNARKAD
            PALAKKAD.

            BY ADV. SRI.M.R.ANISON

RESPONDENT(S)RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------
       1. STATEOF KERALA,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
            SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
            SECRETRIAT,TRIVANDRUM-695 023.

        2. SCRUTINY COIMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATES,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS CHARIMAN
            SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
            SECRETRIAT,TRIVANDRUM-695 023.

        3. THE VIGILANCE CELL OF KIRTADS,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS VIGILANCE OFFICER
            DIRECTORATE OF KIRTADS, KOZHIKODE-670 017.

       4. THE COMMANDANT
            CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE UNIT
            SATHISH DHAWAN SPACE CENTRE SHAR, SRIHARIKOTTA
            NELLOOR DISTIRCT, ANDRA PRADESH-524 142.

        5. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL,
            CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE
            REGIONAL TRAINING CENTRE, BARWAHA
            DARIYAMAHAL (POST OFFICE) KHARGONE DISTRICT
            MADHYA PRADESH-451 115.

            R4,R5 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN,SENIOR PANEL COUNSE
            R1 BYSPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.JAYAKUMAR

            THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-08-2015, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:



         ANTONY DOMINIC & SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ.
          -----------------------------------
                  W.A.No.1008 of 2012
         -----------------------------------
         Dated this the 5th day of August, 2015

                       JUDGMENT

Antony Dominic, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Government Pleader and standing counsel for respondents 4 and 5.

2.W.P(C).12140/11 is filed by the appellant challenging Exts.P6, P11 and P14. The writ petition was disposed of by the judgment under appeal, whereby, though the impugned orders were confirmed, having regard to the amendment made to the list of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes in the year 2007, learned single Judge allowed the appellant to continue as driver in CISF till his retirement on attaining the age of superannuation. Appellant contends that in spite of the amendment in 2007, he is entitled to retain the status of schedule caste on the basis of which he entered the service of respondents 4 and 5.

3. In our view, having regard to the fact that the list of SC/ST stands amended in 2007, the contention now WA.1008/12 2 raised by the counsel for the appellant is plainly untenable. Therefore, we are absolutely unable to accept the said contention.

Appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY, Judge.

kkb.

/True copy/ PS to Judge