Kerala High Court
K.Sanalkumar vs Kerala State Road Transprot ... on 6 July, 2010
Author: C.K. Abdul Rehim
Bench: C.K.Abdul Rehim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/27TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935
WP(C).No. 31342 of 2013 (P)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
--------------------------
K.SANALKUMAR,AGED 57 YEARS,
S/O.KUNJUKUNJU,(RETIRED HEAD VEHICLE SUPERVISOR,
KSRTC, CHERTHALA) RESIDING AT SUJI NIVAS, KALAVAMKODAM.P.O.,
CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DIST.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.P.PRADEEP
SRI.P.K.SATJHEESH KUMAR
RESPONDENT :
----------------------------
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPROT CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA,SC,KSRTC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 18-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C)NO.31342/2013
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1 COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER NO.(46520) ISSUED TO THE 1ST
PETITIONER.
P2 COPY OF THE KERALA GAZATTE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED ON 05/11/2009
P3 COPY OF THE CIRCULAR MEMORANDUM DATED 06/07/2010 ISSUED BY THE
K.S.R.T.C.
P4 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.27198/2013 AND CONNECTED CASES
DATED 06/11/2013
P5 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18/11/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO.JUDGE
sts
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.
-------------------------------------------------
W.P.(c) No. 31342 OF 2013-P
-------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013.
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner had submitted Ext.P5 representation before the respondent seeking re-fixation of the period of qualifying service, on the basis that the period of leave without allowance availed by him is liable to be reckoned as qualifying service in view of Ext.P4 judgment. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied with a direction is issued to consider Ext.P5 and to take an appropriate decision, within a time limit to be stipulated.
2. Under the above mentioned circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider Ext.P5 and to take an appropriate decision in the light of Ext.P4 judgment and other similar judgments, if necessary after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. A decision on Ext.P5 shall be taken at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.
AMG True copy P.A to Judge