Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

G. Jayakumar vs Kerala Land Development Corporation ... on 6 November, 1986

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                           PRESENT:

                          THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

            TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/2ND PHALGUNA, 1938

                                   WP(C).No. 5731 of 2017 (N)
                                      ---------------------------


PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------

                     G. JAYAKUMAR,
                    S/O. GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 43 YEARS,
                    RESIDING AT PUTHENVEETTIL, PADA NORTH,
                    KARUNAGAPPALLY - 690 518,
                    WORKING AS SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
                    OFFICE OF THE PROJECT ENGINEER,
                    KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,
                    K.M.C.732C, OPPOSITE GIRLS HSS,
                    KAYAMKULAM - 690 502.


                     BY ADV. SRI.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN.

RESPONDENTS:-:
-----------------------

        1.           KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,
                     REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
                     TC 11/570, MBC-35, BAINS COMPOUND,
                     MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003.

        2.           STATE OF KERALA,
                     REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
                     AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT,
                     GOVT.SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

        3.           SHAKKEER K.,
                     SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
                     ASSISTANT ACCOUNTS OFFICER-IN-CHARGE,
                     OFFICE OF THE PROJECT ENGINEER,
                     KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,
                     KMC 732-C, OPP.GIRLS H.S.S., KAYAMKULAM - 690 502.

WP(C).No. 5731 of 2017 (N)




    4.       RAJEEVAN,
             SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
             OFFICE OF THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER,
             KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,
             THRISSUR - 680 001.


             R1 BY ADV. SRI.SANJAYTHAMPI, SC.
             R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE.


            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
            ON 21-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
            FOLLOWING:

rs.

WP(C).No. 5731 of 2017 (N)

                                APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-


EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF SPECIAL RULES
            DATED 06.11.1986.

EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION
            ACT DATED 19.12.2016.

EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE REPLYOBTAINED FROM STATE PUBLIC
            INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.07.2016.

EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.11.2016.

EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.116/2017
            DATED 04.01.2017.


RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-       NIL.




                                              //TRUE COPY//


                                              P.S.TO JUDGE


rs.



                         P.V.ASHA, J.
           ---------------------------------------------
               W.P.(C). No. 5731 of 2017
           ----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 21st day of February, 2017



                          JUDGMENT

The petitioner who is working as Senior Grade Assistant under the 1st respondent has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to consider his representations Exts.P4 and P5, in which he has claimed promotion as Assistant Accounts Officer. This Court had, by Ext.P6 judgment in a writ petition filed by the 3rd respondent, directed to consider his representation, in which he had requested for orders for promotion to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer. Since the petitioner in this case also is seeking promotion to the very same post, it is only appropriate for the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner herein also along with the representation of the 3rd respondent and the claims if any of other Senior Grade Assistants before passing orders in terms of the directions contained in Ext.P6 judgment.

Therefore there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider Exts.P4 and P5 representation of petitioner also at the time of hearing of the representation of W.P.(C). No. 5731 of 2017 2 3rd respondent, to be held pursuant to Ext.P3 judgment. Orders shall be passed after hearing the petitioner, the 3rd respondent and the persons if any who are likely to be affected.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-P.V.ASHA, Judge lsn