Kerala High Court
T.S.Suhra vs The Kerala State Housing Board on 6 May, 2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/2ND PHALGUNA 1933
WP(C).No. 6679 of 2006 (T)
-------------------------------------
PETITIONER:
------------------
T.S.SUHRA, E.D.P.ASSISTANT GRADE I,
ON TRAINING AS UDC/JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT,
KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, HEAD OFFICE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.R.B.KAIMAL (SR.)
SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------------------
1. THE KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. SMT.S.INDIRA, ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA
STATE HOUSING BOARD, BRANCH OFFICE, KOZHIKODE.
3. SRI.G.PURUSHOTHAMAN NAIR, ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, BRANCH OFFICE, IRITTY.
4. SMT.P.M.PREMALATHA, ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, BRANCH OFFICE,
MANANTHVADY.
R1 BY SRI.P.C.IYPE, SC, KSHB
R4 BY SMT.A.K.PREETHA
R2 BY SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN
R2 BY SRI.M.R.SASITH
R3 BY SRI.SUDHEER GANESH KUMAR.R.
R3 BY SRI.B.PREMOD
R1 - R4 BY SRI.A.JAYASANKAR, SC KSHB, TVM
R1-R4 BY SRI.GEORGE BOBAN, SC, K.S.H.B.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-02-2012,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
AS
WPC.NO.6679/2006
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE HOUSING BOARD
ESTABLISHMENT REGULATIONS 1995 ISUED AS PER NOTIFICATION
NO.AD3(A) 10497/94/VIG.DT.6/10/1995 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P2: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE HOUSING BOARD
ESTABLISHMENT REGULATIONS 1998 (DRAFT) BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.HBO.399.AD.I ( C )/330096 DATED 6/5/2000
TOGETHER WITH APPENDIX THERETO (SCHEDULE OF TRAINING )
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.AD.I ( C ) 3300/96 DATED 19/1/2006 OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.HBO.31/AD.I(A) 8040/02 DATED 19/1/2006 OF THE
1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.HBO-77/AD1 (A) 2541/06 DATED 14/2/2006
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P7: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.1902
DATED 1/12/2006 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P8: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.HBO-191/AD.1 (A) 3631/07 DATED 9/3/2007
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
AS
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No. 6679 of 2006
==================
Dated this the 21st day of February, 2012
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner commenced service of the Kerala State Housing Board as Confidential Assistant Grade II on 29.1.1981 and she was promoted as Confidential Assistant Grade I on 10.12.1987. She became a graduate in 1991. She was promoted as EDP Assistant Grade I, on 6.5.1994. According to the petitioner, by 1999, the petitioner acquired all the qualifications required for promotion to the post of Accounts Officer/Senior Superintendent in accordance with Ext.P1 Regulations. Such promotion is in the ratio of 15:1:1 among Junior Superintendents, Stenographers and EDP Assistants. For that, completion of the prescribed period of training, as mandated by the rules, had to be undergone by the petitioner. By Ext.P3 dated 6.5.2000, the petitioner was deputed for such training. The petitioner submits that despite the period of training having been over, the petitioner had not been given promotion and she continued to be Accounts Officer/Senior Superintendent Trainee. While so, by Ext.P6 order dated 14.2.2006, respondents 2 to 4, who are Junior Superintendents, have been promoted to the post of Senior Superintendent, which, according to the petitioner, is overlooking the lawful claim of the petitioner in the quota prescribed for EDP w.p.c.6679/06 - : 2 :-
Assistants. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs;
"i) A writ of certiorari quashing/setting aside Ext.P6 order to the extent it promotes Respondents 2 to 4 as Accounts Officers.
ii) A writ of mandamus to the 1st respondent to appoint the petitioner by transfer as Accounts Officer in the fist of the three vacancies in which respondents 2 to 4 were promoted as Accounts Officers, and to grant all consequential benefits including arrears of salary for the period from 14.2.1996 (Date of Ext.P6 order)."
2. None of the respondents have filed any counter affidavit. But the respondents argue on the basis of Ext.P1 Regulations.
3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.
4. On 29.5.2007, this Court has passed the following order;
"The 1st respondent is directed to file a statement/affidavit, on the claim of the petitioner that she is the senior most candidate awaiting promotion to the post of Section Officer, from the category of Stenographers/EDP Assistant etc. in the ratio of 15:1:1. The petitioner asserts no one has been promoted from the category of Typists or stenographers.
Post on 5.6.07."
Subsequently, by order dated 5.6.2007, this Court directed as follows:
"Pursuant to the direction of this Court issued on 29.05.07, the learned standing counsel for the Housing Board, after getting instruction, submitted that the petitioner is the next person to be promoted under the quota reserved for Stenographers/EDP Assistants, to the post of Accounts Officer/Senior Superintendent. The claim of the petitioner has already been considered by the D.P.C. A list has been prepared, in which the petitioner is included and the Housing Board is waiting for the approval of the Government for the said list, for effecting promotions from it. No provision under the Kerala State Housing Board Act has been brought to my notice, which mandates approval of the Government for the D.P.C. list, prepared by the Housing Board for promotion. In view of D.P.C. list already prepared, the 1st respondent is directed to promote the petitioner to the post of Accounts Officer/Senior Superintendent within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order, with effect from the date, she was found eligible by the D.P.C."
w.p.c.6679/06 - : 3 :-
5. It is submitted that the petitioner has been promoted in accordance with that order. Now the only question is of seniority as between the petitioner on the one hand and respondents 2 to 4 on the other. If, as on the date when respondents 2 to 4 were promoted, the petitioner was actually entitled to be promoted, then the petitioner would be entitled to seniority over respondents 2 to 4. But the learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4 points out that going by Ext.P1 Regulations themselves, the petitioner is not entitled to be considered for promotion. Their argument is that if at the time when the turn of the EDP Assistant for promotion as Senior Superintendent arose, none was qualified for that post, the vacancy will be lost to that category altogether and the same shall be given to Junior Superintendents. Respondents 2 to 4 would contend that that is what happened in this case. When the vacancy earmarked for EDP Assistants arose, the petitioner was not qualified and, therefore, that vacancy was filled up by a Junior Superintendent by promotion and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be considered for such promotion in the next turn for EDP Assistants, which arose only after the interim order dated 5.6.2007.
6. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.
7. The relevant clause reads thus:
w.p.c.6679/06 - : 4 :-
Category Method of appointment Qualification
(1) (2) (3)
xxx xxx xxx
(v) Senior Superint- 1. By promotion from the 1. Must possess degree endent/Accounts category of Junior of any recognised Officer Superintendent. University or its equivalent qualification.
AND
2. By transfer from qualified 2. Must have passed hands from among Account Test (Higher)-
categories of, conducted by Kerala
(a) Selection Grade/ Senior Public Service Commi- Grade Confidential Assistant ssion (Part I Paper 1 not and EDP Assistant Grade I compulsory)
3. Must have passed the P.W.D. Test conducted by the Public Service Commission
4. Must have passed paper III of Account
(b) Senior Grade Typist/Fair Test Lower conducted Copy Superintendent. by the Public Service Commission for the ministerial and executive staff of Kerala State Electricity Board.
5. Must have passed MOP/Secretarial Manual Test conducted by the Public Service Commission.
Note:- 1. Appointment by promotion from Junior Superintendent.
and appointment by transfer from among Selection Grade/Senior Grade Confidential Assistant/EDP Assistant Grade-I. and Senior Grade Typist /Fair Copy Superintendent, to the post of Senior Superintendent/Accounts Officer shall be made in the ratio w.p.c.6679/06 - : 5 :-
15:1:1. A Confidential Assistant/Senior Grade Typist EDP Assistant Grade 1 shall not however be appointed as Senior Superintendent/Accounts Officer in preference to a Junior Superintendent who has the next chance of promotion as Senior Superintendent and whose total length of service is equal or greater than that of the Confidential Assistant/Senior Grade Typist/EDP Assistant Grade I. If no eligible person from the categories of Typist or Confidential Assistant, EDP Assistant is available in his turn for appointment as Senior Superintendent/Accounts Officer, such vacancy shall be lost to that category and the same shall be given to the Junior Superintendent.
Note:-2. The Confidential Assistant/Senior Grade Typist/EDP Assistant having above qualification and who is likely to be appointed as Senior Superintendent within a period of three years may be posted for training as Upper Division Clerk and Junior Superintendent for a Minimum period of one year. Thereafter, they may be allowed to continue to work as Upper Division Clerk/Junior Superintendent till they are appointed as Senior Superintendent.
(underlining supplied) Going by the same, the vacancies of Senior Superintendents have to be filled up from among various categories in the ratio of 15:1:1, to which, the ratio of the EDP Assistant is one. If, when the turn of EDP Assistant arose, nobody is qualified, the category of EDP Assistant would lose that vacancy altogether. The petitioner has not chosen to state in the writ petition as to when exactly the vacancy earmarked for EDP arose. To enable the petitioner to get seniority over respondents 2 to 4, the petitioner has to necessarily state that on the date when the vacancy earmarked for EDP as arose, the petitioner was actually qualified and she was not given promotion. As such, necessary pleadings are conspicuously absent in this writ petition. Without proving that fact, the petitioner cannot claim seniority over respondents 2 to 4, insofar as they have been promoted in the turn w.p.c.6679/06 - : 6 :-
applicable to them. As such, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, I make it clear that insofar as the petitioner's promotion pursuant to the order dated 5.6.2007 is on the basis of the submission of the learned Standing Counsel that the petitioner is the next person to be promoted under the quota reserved for EDP Assistant, the promotion given pursuant to that order shall be protected.
Sd/-
sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge