Kerala High Court
P.Ajayakumar vs Suresh Kumar M.R on 31 January, 2020
Author: K. Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran, Ashok Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 11TH MAGHA, 1941
R.P.No.103 OF 2020 IN WA. 721/2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO.721/2019 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DATED 08.08.2019
REVIEW PETITIONERS/THIRD PARTIES:
1 P.AJAYAKUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS
OVERSEER (ELECTRICAL), 110 KV SUB STATION, NADAPURAM,
P.O.NADAPURAM,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673504,
EMPLOYEE CODE NO.1044277.
2 ANIL KUMAR K.,
SUB ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL), ELECTRICAL SECTION,
AIPUR, P.O.AIPUR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
EMPLOYEE CODE NO.1043110.
BY ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH
RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:
1 SURESH KUMAR M.R., (EMPLOYEE CODE NO.1043169),
OVERSEER (GRADATION NO.3459/2008),
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
ELECTRICAL SECTION, KIZHAKKAMBALAM,
ERNAKULAM-683562.
2 RADHAKRISHNAN AALORA, (EMPLOYEE CODE NO.1042907),
OVERSEER (GRADATION NO.3585/2008),
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
ELECTRICAL SECTION, KOLACHERRY, KANNUR-670601.
3 RATHEESAN KUNIYIL MAROLI,
(EMPLOYEE CODE NO.1042951), OVERSEER (GRADATION
NO.13/2012), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
220 KV SUB STATION, KANJIRODE, KANNUR-670591.
R.P.No.103 OF 2020 2
4 SREENIVASAN M.,
(EMPLOYEE CODE NO.1043499), OVERSEER (GRADATION
NO.3533/2008), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
110 KV SUB STATION, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR-670307.
5 ANIL AMBAN MUKRI,
(EMPLOYEE CODE NO.1043001), OVERSEER (GRADATION
NO.17/2012), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
ELECTRICAL SECTION, KANNUR-670002.
6 SUMITHRAN N.,
(EMPLOYEE CODE NO.1043169), OVERSEER (GRADATION
NO.3581/2008), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
ELECTRICAL SECTION, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR-670307.
7 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VIDYUTHI BHAVANAM,
PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
8 CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM),
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
VIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
9 MANOJ M., AGED 40 YEARS
S/O.LATE M.S.MOHANDAS, OVERSEER, ELECTRICAL
SECTION, NORTH PARUR, RESIDING AT DEVANANDANAM,
WEST KADUNGALLOOR P.O., ALUVA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683110.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.MOHANDAS,
SMT.ANEETHA.A.G.,
SRI.S.M.PRASANTH
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
31.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P.No.103 OF 2020 3
JUDGMENT
K. Vinod Chandran, J.
The review is filed by persons who are not parties in the writ petition, with leave; who were faced with reversion as per the judgment sought to be reviewed.
2. The issue agitated in the writ petition was as to whether there could be equation of ITI [Electronics] and ITI [Electrical]. The Division Bench found based on Ext.P6 order that already the Board has ordered ITI [Electronics] and ITI [Electrical] to be equated,after hearing the representative unions and in such circumstances, there could be no denial of promotion to the appellants. The Division Bench also noticed that WP(C) No.11952 of 2017 was pending before the learned Single Judge, wherein there was a stay of consideration of the ITI Certificate holders for R.P.No.103 OF 2020 4 promotion as Sub Engineers. Despite that the Division Bench directed consideration of promotion subject to final disposal of WP(C) No.11952 of 2017.
3. It is submitted by the addl. 3rd respondent in the appeal that an ITI qualified Overseer, cannot claim promotion as per the Regulations issued by the Central Electricity Regulatory Authority [for brevity, 'the CERA']. That the CERA prohibits promotion to persons, who are not qualified as per the Regulations. A learned Single Judge of this Court, it is submitted, has already held that the Regulations have to be followed in its letter and spirit. In such circumstances, it is the contention that the ITI Certificate-holders at least from the day on which the Central Electricity Authority has brought out the Regulations are disabled from promotion.
R.P.No.103 OF 2020 5
4. We notice that none of the review petitioners were impleaded in the appeal or the writ petition. Despite their promotion orders having been challenged, none of the ITI [Electrical] holders were also impleaded and they never had the opportunity before the Single Judge or the Division Bench.
In such circumstances, we review the judgment and direct restoration of the case before the Division Bench. The writ appeal shall be posted according to roster. The review petition is allowed without any order on costs.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE.
Sd/-
ASHOK MENON, JUDGE.
sp/31/01/2020 //True Copy// P.A. To Judge R.P.No.103 OF 2020 6 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE B.O. (FTD) NO.
834/2017 (EST.II/2089/2017) DATED 30.03.2017.
ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.EB2/SE(ELE)/WA721 OF 2019 DATED 07.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE W.A.