Kerala High Court
K.Soosamma John vs State Of Kerala on 11 July, 2007
Author: Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
Bench: Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP No. 28671 of 2000(L)
1. K.SOOSAMMA JOHN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.BOSE
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :11/07/2007
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN,J
=======================
O.P.No.28671 of 2000
=======================
Dated this the 11th day of July, 2007
JUDGMENT
Petitioner entered the service as a Tracer on 21.1.1970. On 13.7.1970 she was promoted as Second Grade Overseer. Thereafter she was promoted as First Grade Overseer on 29.6.1981 and as Assistant Engineer on 25.10.1997. Having enjoyed three regular promotions, there was no question of granting the petitioner as second higher grade. However, that was erroneously granted. This was noted in audit and recovery of the over-drawals was ordered. Such amount has been recovered by the Government from the petitioner's pay, DCRG etc.
2. The plea of the petitioner is that her placement as a Second Grade Overseer on 13.7.1970 within a period of six months of her entry into service cannot be treated as a promotion, but only an appointment by transfer. The category of Tracer and Category of Second Grade Overseer are part of the O.P.No.28671/2000 :2: service constituted and governed by the Special Rules for the Kerala Public works Engineering Subordinate Service. Those rules provide promotion as the method of appointment as Second Grade Overseer from the category of Third Grade Overseer/Tracer etc. It is a case where the petitioner was given an erroneous promotion. She, however, enjoyed that also. But for such promotion, her entitlement for further promotion on the dates noted above would not have legitimately accrued in terms of the Special Rules. Reverting to Rule 2(13) in Para I of Kerala Service Rules, it can be seen that an appointment by transfer, thereby meaning the entitlement of a person to be called as recruited by transfer, would arise only if at the time of his such appointment, he was either a full member or an approved probationer in any other service. This is not one so since appointment by transfer is not a method by which the petitioner could have been placed in the category of Second Grade Overseer, while she was promoted, from a lower post in the same service.
O.P.No.28671/2000 :3:
3. For the forgoing reasons, impugned action taken by the respondents is not faulty. There is no illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned decisions.
In the results, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. No costs.
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dvs