Kerala High Court
P.Valsaraj vs State Of Kerala on 9 January, 2025
2025:KER:1746
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 19TH POUSHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 16423 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 P.VALSARAJ
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O.R.NARAYANAN, SCIENTIST F, AGENCY FOR NEW AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY (ANERT), PMG-
LAW COLLEGE ROAD, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033, RESIDING AT NLRA-296-A,
NEERAZHI LANE, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695011.
2 PRAMOD N.E.,
AGED 52 YEARS
K.SUBRAMANIA MARAR, SCIENTIST E2, AGENCY FOR NEW AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY (ANERT), PMG-
LAW COLLEGE ROAD, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033, RESIDING AT DAFFODILS,
T.C.27/444(5), THARA-299A, GAS HOUSE ROAD, KUNNUKUZHI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695035.
BY ADV VISHNU S.CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE SECRETARY
POWER DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 AGENCY FOR NEW AND RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY (ANERT),
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, VIKAS
BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.
WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 :2:
2025:KER:1746
4 THE GOVERNING BODY OF AGENCY FOR NEW AND RENEWABLE
ENERGY RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY (ANERT),
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AS MEMBER
SECRETARY, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
695033.
5 THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF AGENCY FOR NEW AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY (ANERT),
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AS MEMBER
SECRETARY, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
695033.
6 THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
AGENCY FOR NEW AND RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY (ANERT), VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.
BY ADVS.
GP, NIMA JACOB
T.R.HARIKUMAR
ARJUN RAGHAVAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 09.01.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 :3:
2025:KER:1746
VIJU ABRAHAM , J.
===========================
WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021
============================
Dated this the 9th day of January, 2025
JUDGMENT
Above writ petition is filed seeking to quash Exts.P2, P3 and P13 and for a direction to the Government to examine and rectify the anomalies and illegalities in Ext.P3 restructuring report and Ext.P2 restructuring order by engaging a committee of experts seeking due consideration to the submission made in this writ petition, and giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and issue appropriate corrective orders expeditiously and to keep Ext.P2 order in abeyance till such orders are issued.
2. Petitioners are presently working as scientists in Agency for New and Renewable Energy Research and Technology (ANERT for short). The staff structure of ANERT comprises of scientific stream and technical streams apart from an administrative division. While the scientists come under the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research Pattern of the Central Government in respect of salary and service conditions, the rest of the employees of ANERT are governed under the State Government norms. The Government took a decision to accord administrative sanction for the organisational WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 :4: 2025:KER:1746 study of ANERT including amending the vision, mission, action plan/strategy of the organisation in tandem with National/Stage Council of renewable energy. Based on the same, Ext.P3 restructuring report was submitted by the agency entrusted to study the same. A perusal of Ext.P3 would reveal that restructuring of ANERT is necessary as it aims at remodelling ANERT from an implementing agency to an agency which concentrates more on need based research and development activities for the State in the renewable energy sector. As regards the scientists are concerned the restructuring report specifically mandated in clause 3 under Chapter 4 "proposed organisational structure of ANERT" as follows:-
"3. R & D Division The R&D division at ANERT shall comprise of eight scientists.
Proposed Staff Strength - R&D Division Designation Number Scientist 8 Total 8 The recruitment and promotion of these Scientists shall be as per CSIR Rules. At present there are two Scientist B and two Scientist F working in ANERT. Their Service Rules shall be continued to be governed by the CSIR Rules.
One time mapping for employees at the time of implementation. All the four Scientists in ANERT shall be granted promotions as per CSIR promotion rules by relaxing the creening/assessment process by invoking the relevant clause (9) in CSIR rules, WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 :5: 2025:KER:1746 considering the fact that their routine responsibilities involve considerable project/technology management works rather than pure R&D works."
It is the contention of the petitioners that a mere perusal of Ext.P3 restructuring report itself reveals many serious anomalies and unscientific recommendations which will seriously affect the institution adversely. It is further contended that the executive committee and the governing body of ANERT which are the policy decision making authorities have not examined or recommended the restructuring report before it was sent to the Government for final approval. The specific contention of the petitioners is that the restructuring report Ext.P2 was placed by the Director on the 52 nd meeting of the executive committee and the executive committee as per Ext.P4 decision decided to place it before the governing body. The subsequent decision i.e. the 53 rd decision which is produced as Ext.P5 decided to convene another executive committee meeting and in the said meeting the revised structuring report shall also be presented. But a perusal of Ext.P6 reveals that the governing body meeting was not convened and as per the direction issued by the Government as per letter No.190/PSC/206/PD to submit the restructuring proposal of ANERT immediately to the Government, the same was submitted to Government for consideration. WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 :6:
2025:KER:1746
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the ANERT had undergone organisational restructuring in 2009 following a committee report which finalised the qualification of various posts in ANERT and the Government have approved it as per Ext.P7. A perusal of Ext.P7 Government order would reveal that before the Government approved the same, it was considered and approved first by the executive committee and then by the governing body of ANERT, and these obligatory procedures have been bypassed in the present restructuring process. The post of Director in ANERT is in the same grade of scientist-G in CSIR staff category. Going by Ext.P8 notification the qualification required for the post of Director ANERT was a First Class Masters Degree in any branch of Engineering/PhD in Science with specialisation in energy technology or energy engineering/ PhD in energy economics from a reputed institution. But by Ext.P9 a committee was constituted and by Ext.P10 revised qualification was prescribed for the post of Director which mandated that, for the post of Director B.tech in Engineering with PhD in renewable energy or Masters Degree in physical/natural science with PhD in renewal energy is a mandatory provision. But on a perusal of Ext.P3 the said qualification of the Director has now been watered down and for existing ANERT officers to aspire for the post of Director they should have graduation/post graduation in Engineering WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 :7: 2025:KER:1746 (Electrical and Electronic Engineering/ Mechanical Engineering/ Electronics and Communication Engineering/ Applied Electronic Engineering) with 25 years of experience in ANERT and for external candidates, B.Tech degree in Engineering (Electrical and Electronic Engineering/ Mechanical Engineering / Electronics and Communication Engineering / Applied Electronics Engineering) with 20 years experience of which 8 years at senior management level in similar organisation/public sector. In the qualification for the post of Director now recommended by Ext.P3 the qualification of having a PhD in renewable energy has been taken away. This was pointed out by the petitioners to show that Ext.P2 report has been submitted absolutely without any application of mind and many of the recommendations are illogical, irrational, arbitrary and externally influenced.
4. Petitioners contend that by Ext.P2 order the report of Centre for Management Development Study on restructuring of ANERT was accepted by the Government excluding the following:-
i) Enhancing the retirement age of employees to 60 years.
ii) Relaxation of screening and assessment process by invoking the relevant clause in CSIR rules while considering the promotion of scientists.WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 :8:
2025:KER:1746
iii) Government has further decided to retain the number of scientists as 4 as against the number of scientists 8 recommended by CMD in the report.
Petitioners submit that Ext.P2 order was issued by the Government on the basis of Ext.P13 communication issued by Director of ANERT which is extracted below:-
"Kind attention is invited to the reference cited. A statement was included in the Restructuring Report of ANERT submitted by CMD, page No.47 as given below.
"one time mapping for employees at the time of implementation. All the four Scientists in ANERT shall be granted promotions as per CSIR promotion rules by relaxing the screening/assessment process by invoking the relevant clause (9) in CSIR rules, considering the fact that their routine responsibilities involve considerable project/technology management works rather than pure R&D works".
Since the above proposal is against the spirit of CSIR Recruitment and promotion Rules, so it is requested that the above proposal for the promotion of Scientists in ANERT by relaxing the screening/assessment process by invoking the relevant clause (9) in CSIR rules may not be considered. The same relaxation included inadvertently in the draft proposal may be excluded for protecting the Research and Development activities of ANERT."
It is aggrieved by the same that the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-
WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 :9:
2025:KER:1746 (1) A writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order to call for the records leading to the issue of Exihibit-P2 and P3 and set aside Exhibit P2 and P3.
(2) A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Government to examine and rectify the anomalies and illegalities in the Exhibit-P3 Restructuring Report and the Exhibit-P2 Restructuring Order by engaging a committee of experts, giving due consideration to the submissions made in this Writ Petition, and giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, and to issue appropriate corrective orders expeditiously, and to keep the Exhibit-P2 Order in abeyance until such orders are issued.
(3) Any other further relief or order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice. (4) Award the cost of these proceedings.
(5) A writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order to call for the records leading to the issue of Exhibit P13 and set aside Exhibit P13.
(6) A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to examine and rectify the errors in Exhibit P3 report and Exhibit P2 order by engaging a committee of expert, taking into account the contentions raised in Exhibit P17.
(7) A writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order to call for the records leading to the issue of Exhibit P2 and set aside Exhibit P2 to the extent the same disallows the recommendation in Exhibit P3 report for granting the pending grade promotion to the Scientists as a onetime measure as part of the organizational restructuring of WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 10 : 2025:KER:1746 ANERT, with liberty to Government to modify the same in the process of rectification of anomalies.
5. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by 3 rd respondent, wherein it is contended that the writ petition is not maintainable and the petitioners are working with ANERT as scientists and are bound by the decision taken by ANERT as approved by the Government, and therefore the petitioners who are employees of ANERT have no locus to challenge the restructuring of the organisation. Petitioners are beneficiaries of Government orders issued previously regarding the multiple promotions and their present attempt is to hamper the smooth functioning of ANERT. Though Rule 9 of CSRI Scientists Recruitment and Assessment Promotion Rules 2001 empowers the governing body to relax all or any of the provisions of these Rules wherever considered necessary, the learned Standing Counsel for the 3 rd respondent ANERT would submit that, on 20.01.2015 Rule 9 was amended directing power to the Director General CSRI to relax/modify amend any of the existing Rules to overcome the operational difficulties and for speedy assessment of the scientists on the recommendation of the Recruitment and Assessment Board wherever considered necessary, and such relaxation/amendment/modification if any shall be ratified by the governing body. On the basis of the same, it is contended WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 11 : 2025:KER:1746 that there is no general power to relax any or all of the provisions of the Rule wherever considered necessary. But the provision for relaxation or modification was given from specific purpose. As regards the contention of the petitioners that the restructuring report has not been placed before the executive committee and the governing body of ANERT, it is submitted that though the report has not been placed before the executive committee and the governing body the report was directly scrutinised by the Secretary to Government, Power Department who is also the Chairman of the Executive Committee, the Director of ANERT, who is the Member Secretary of the executive committee and the representatives of the Finance Department who is also a member of the executive committee. As these authorities have scrutinised the report the laches if any in not placing the report before the executive committee and the governing body will not in any way affect Ext.P2 decision taken by the Government. Further it is contended that the 56th meeting of the executive committee of ANERT has approved the decision taken by the Government in Ext.P2 as evident from Exts.R3(a) and R3(b). It is also stated that the general body meeting is not convened regularly and last of the meeting was held only on 24.03.2017. As regards the contention raised by the petitioners that there has been dilution in the qualification to the post of Director of WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 12 : 2025:KER:1746 ANERT it is contended that the earlier qualification criteria stipulated was too stringent making the availability of candidate to the post too less, and on finding that the earlier restructuring report was not practical that the same has now been changed as per Ext.P3 which was accepted by the Government as per Ext.P2 order.
6. A detailed reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioners to the said counter affidavit, wherein it is contended that the failure to place Ext.P2 before the executive committee and the governing body cannot be accepted in as much as the executive committee and governing body exist for a reason, and ANERT is conceived as a Society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literacy, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955 and the memorandum of association of ANERT clearly specifies the roles and functions of the executive committee and the governing body and the procedures have to be followed, which has not been done in the present case. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the Government before taking a decision as per Ext.P2 has also not followed the procedures contemplated, in as much as on 03.02.2021 the report along with the consolidated filing note was placed before the Minister for Electricity with an endorsement that the file has been vetted by P & ARD and the Minister has approved the same. But it is contended that it was never placed before the P WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 13 : 2025:KER:1746 & ARD, and later on Chief Minister approved the same for placing the matter before the Cabinet with the modification suggested by the Chief Minister. Based on Ext.P3 letter the matter was placed before the Cabinet and got approved. Petitioners submit that the same is without following the procedure and therefore is liable to be interfered with. Against Exts.P2 and P3 a detailed representation has been submitted by the 1st petitioner to the 2nd respondent, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P17. Petitioners submit that no decision has been taken on Ext.P17 till date.
7. The Government has also filed a detailed counter affidavit before the 2nd respondent, wherein it is contended that the Government has power to take decision on restructuring proposal of an organisation under their control and the Government has examined all aspects of the proposal and approved the same after conducting a work study and also with the approval of the Cabinet, and therefore the contention of the petitioners that the restructuring proposal has no approval of governing body and executive committee of ANERT is without any basis. The qualification of Director could be changed from time to time at the discretion of the Government and there is no stipulation that the Government should stick on to the earlier qualification which was suggested a decade ago, and more flexibility in qualification criteria is necessary for WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 14 : 2025:KER:1746 getting more competitive and versatile candidates in case of direct recruitment for the post and sought for dismissal of the writ petition.
8. I have heard the rival contentions on both sides.
9. The Government decided to conduct an organisational study of ANERT including amending its vision, mission, action plan and strategy of the organisation in tandem with the National/State policy on renewable energy based on which the Centre for Management Development Thiruvananthapuram was entrusted with their study who has filed Ext.P3 report. A perusal of Ext.P3 report would reveal the reason for restructuring of ANERT, which is extracted below:-
"The re-visioning/re-structuring exercise is found to be essential as this aims at remodelling ANERT from an implementing agency to an agency which concentrates more on need based R&D activities for the State in the renewable energy sector."
(Underlines supplied) So the essential purpose for the restructuring of ANERT was to change ANERT from an implementing agency to an agency which concentrate more on need based research and development activities of the State in the renewable energy sector. Naturally research scientists are the most important part of any research and development agency like ANERT. That is why in Ext.P3 recommendations were made to the effect that all four scientists in WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 15 : 2025:KER:1746 ANERT shall be granted promotions as per CSIR promotion Rules by relaxing the screening/assessment process by invoking the relevant clause (9) of CSIR Rules. Therefore, relaxation was recommended taking into consideration a very relevant factor that those scientists were as such involved in project/technology management work rather than pure R&D work.
10. Memorandum of Association of ANERT is produced as Ext.P16 which reveals that the said agency was formed as a Society under the Travancore-Cochin Literacy, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955 which defines the duties and powers of the general body as well as the executive committee of ANERT. The governing body has general superintendence and management of the affairs of the agency and shall have all powers and shall perform all such functions as are necessary or proper for achievement or furtherance of the agency. In clause 6.1 (b) it is mandated that the Government may from time to time issue such directions or instructions as the Government may consider necessary in regard to the conduct of agency or other matters pertaining to the management or administration of the agency. Whereas the duties of the executive committee is the management and administration and control of the affairs of the agency subject to the overall superintendence and policy directions of the governing WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 16 : 2025:KER:1746 body. The power of the Director is also mentioned in the Memorandum of Association which mandates that the Director shall be a technically qualified person and shall be the Chief Executive who is responsible for the proper administration and conduct of affairs of the agency and has to perform all such acts and duties and exercise all such powers under these regulation and bye laws of the agency and also those which may be delegated or assigned to him by the governing body and the committee from time to time. Therefore, going by Ext.P16 Memorandum of Association it is the governing body who have overall superintendence and has power to issue policy directions to the executive committee.
11. After Ext.P3 organisational study report was received the executive committee of the ANERT in its 52 nd meeting as per Ext.P4 decision decided to place the matter before the governing body. Subsequent decision taken by the executive committee as per Ext.P5 decided that another executive committee meeting should be convened and the revised structure and report shall be presented before the executive committee. A perusal of Ext.P6 also reveals that the matter has not been placed before the executive committee thereafter or before the governing body and pursuant to the direction issued by the Government the matter was directly submitted before the Government for a decision. Thereafter WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 17 : 2025:KER:1746 Government took a decision as per Ext.P2 and a perusal of Ext.P2 would reveal that said decision was taken pursuant to Ext.P3 recommendation of the Director of ANERT, wherein he has reported that the proposal in the restructuring report as regards the relaxation from the promotion Rules as regards the scientists are concerned is against the spirit of CSIR Recruitment and Promotion Rules, and that the said relaxation included in the draft proposal may be excluded from protecting the research and development activities of ANERT, and Ext.P13 was accepted and Ext.P2 order was issued wherein the relaxation recommended as regards scientists were concerned was excluded.
12. ANERT is an independent agency, a Registered Society registered under the provisions of the Travancore-Cochin Literacy, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955. Of course the Government has got control over the same. The powers have been defined in the Memorandum of Association as evident from Ext.P16. Ext.P16 also reveals that overall superintendence and power to issue policy direction is upon the governing body. It is in consonance with the procedure contemplated in Ext.P16 Memorandum of Association that the matter was attempted to be placed before the executive committee as per Ext.P4 which decided to place the matter before the governing body which has not been WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 18 : 2025:KER:1746 done in the present case. A perusal of Ext.P6 would reveal that the matter has never been placed before the governing body as the Government has requested ANERT to forward the restructuring proposal to the Government immediately. As stated earlier, the restructuring of ANERT was required to change ANERT from an implementation agency to that of a research and development activity for the State in the renewable energy sector. It is without any doubt that in an agency which is involved in the research and development activity, the prime importance is for the scientists who are directly involved in the research and development activities of the agency like in ANERT.
13. I am not able to comprehend the reason stated in Ext.P13 to exclude the recommendation regarding relaxation in the matter of promotion as regards scientists were concerned stating that the said proposal should be excluded from protecting the research and development activities of ANERT. I find absolutely no reason how the development activities of ANERT will be affected if promotions are granted to the scientists who are working there.
14. Ext.P16 Memorandum of Association of ANERT reveals that the executive committee as well as the governing body shall consist of the following members:-
(i) Minister (Electricity) Chairman
WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 19 :
2025:KER:1746
(ii) Principal Secretary to Government, Power Vice Chairman
Department
(iii) Secretary to Government Planning & Member
Economic Affairs Department
(iv) Principal Secretary to Government Local Member
Self Government (Rural Development)
Department
(v) Secretary to Government, Finance Member
(Expenditure) Department
(vi) Chairman, Kerala State Electricity Board Member
(vii) Director, Energy Management Centre Member
(viii) Chief Electrical Inspector Member
(ix) Member-Secretary, kerala State Council for Member
Science Technology & Environment
(x) Chairman, Institute of Engineers (India), Member
Kerala Centre
(xi) One representative of Centre for Wind Member
Energy Technology, Chennai
(xii) One representative of the Ministry of Non- Member
Conventional Energy Source (MINES)
(xiii) Two experts working in the field of Non- Member
Conventional Energy nominated by the
Chairman
(xiv) Director, ANERT Member
Secretary
The executive committee shall consist of following seven members:-
(i) Principal Secretary to Government, Power Chairman Department WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 20 : 2025:KER:1746
(ii) Chairman, Kerala State Electricity Board Member
(iii) Member Secretary, Kerala State Council for Member Science, Technology & Environment
(iv) Secretary (Finance-Expenditure) Member Department or his/her nominee not below Additional Secretary to Government (Finance)
(v) Two experts working in the filed of Non- Member Member Conventional Energy nominated by the Chairman of the Governing Body
(vi) Director ANERT Member Secretary The governing body as contemplated in Ext.P16 is a highly specialised body including Government officials and also technical experts who are well experienced to consider the restructuring proposal and to decide as to whether the proposals in the restructuring records should be accepted or not and submit its views to the Government for the final approval. But admittedly, Ext.P3 restructuring report has not been placed before the Governing body of ANERT. The answer to the same as given in the counter affidavit filed by the ANERT that the matter has been considered by the Secretary of Power Department, Finance Department and also by the Director of ANERT, and therefore there is absolutely no lack of consideration of Ext.P3 restructuring report though it is not placed before the governing body cannot be accepted. The ANERT being a WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 21 : 2025:KER:1746 society which has its own governing body as well as an executive committee, any restructuring of the ANERT should have been placed before the governing body first and the governing body should have given its proposal which could be accepted in toto or could have been accepted by Government with modifications. But what has been done in the present case is that without placing Ext.P3 restructuring report of the governing body the Director has issued Ext.P13 communication requesting to delete the proposal for granting relaxation for scientists in the matter of promotion.
15. I am of the view that the communication issued as per Ext.P13 without placing Ext.P3 restructuring report before the governing council cannot be sustained in law, in as much as the power of the Director of ANERT going by Ext.P16 is to perform all such acts and duties and the powers given under the regulation and the bye law of the agency and also which are delegated or assigned by the governing body and the committees from time to time. No valid reasons have been stated in Ext.P13 for not accepting the proposal in the restructuring report to grant relaxation to the scientists in the matter of promotion. Ext.P2 blankly accepted Ext.P13 without assigning any reason for the same. I am of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the Government, for which Exts.P2 and P13 to the extent it excluded the WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 22 : 2025:KER:1746 proposal for relaxation granted to scientists in the matter of promotion are set aside. Ext.P3 restructuring report shall be placed before the governing body of ANERT, and the proposal for relaxation to scientists in the matter of promotion as suggested in Ext.P3 restructuring report shall be considered and the opinion in this regard shall be submitted to the Government by the Director based on the decision to be taken by the governing body. Based on the report submitted by the Director on the basis of the decision of the governing body the matter shall be placed before the Government again, who shall re-examine the same and take a fresh decision after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners/representative of the petitioners and after taking into consideration Ext.P17 request submitted by the petitioners. A decision in this regard shall be taken within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
With the above said direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE sbk/-
WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 23 :
2025:KER:1746 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16423/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT)NO.3/2020/PD DATED 7.1.2020.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS)NO.8/2021/POWER DATED 25.2.2021.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPENDIX TO THE
GOVERNMENT ORDER AT EXHIBIT P2 APPROVING
THE RESTRUCTURING REPORT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 52ND
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 53RD
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RTI REPLY VIDE
NO.42509/SPIO/ANERT/2021 DATED 7.4.2021 ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, ANERT.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.57/2011/PD DATED 23.2.2011.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED LAST TIME BY THE GOVERNMENT IN 2010 FOR THE POST OF DIRECTOR ANERT.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.1/2013/PD DATED 2.1.2013.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.5/2014/PD DATED 28.2.2014.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS VIDE AO.NO.41/HRM/ANERT/2021 DATED 26.2.2021 ISSUED BY THE ANERT.
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER A.O.NO.34/HRM/ANERT/2011 DATED 24.2.2011 ISSUED BY THE ANERT.
WP(C) No. 16423 of 2021 : 24 :
2025:KER:1746
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER
NO.ANERT-ADM/69/2017-OA1(HRM) DATED
10.2.2021 ISSUED BY THE ANERT TO THE
GOVERNMENT.
Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.12/2021/POWER
DATED 19.3.2021.
Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.68/2021/PD DATED
1.6.2021.
Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.12/2004/PD DATED
5.6.2004.
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R1(a) G.O. (MS) No. 12/2021/Power dated
19.03.2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P18 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.ANERT-
ADM/69/2017-OA1(HRM) DATED 09.05.2022
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.