LAWS(KER)-2018-1-233

STATE OF KERALA Vs. MOHANDAS

Decided On January 17, 2018
STATE OF KERALA Appellant
V/S
MOHANDAS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are the respondents in O.A. No. 1492/2016. The grievance is against Ext. P3 verdict passed on 26/07/2017 whereby the O.A filed by the respondent herein was allowed setting aside Annexure A4 order declining the claim for promotion to the post of Senior Town Planner and to have Annexure A2 representation submitted by him to be considered and to pass appropriate orders within a time frame as mentioned therein, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the applicant.

(2.) Heard the learned Government Pleader as well as Adv. Sri. Brijesh Mohan, the learned counsel who entered appearance on behalf of the respondent.

(3.) The applicant was working as Town Planner, when he was sent on deputation as Member Secretary to the Thrissur Development Authority in February 2016. The next post in the hirearchy of promotion is that of Senior Town Planner. After analysing the credentials of the eligible hands, Annexure A1 select list was prepared and published by the Department on 06/01/2016. According to the respondent/applicant, he was eligible to be promoted to the said post, having been placed at Sl. No. 3 in Annexure A1 and that sufficient vacancies were available to have him promoted. However, promotion was not being effected by the Department referring to 'model code of conduct' that came to be notified by the Election Commission, which made the respondent to file Annexure A2 representation dated 11-04-2016 before the Secretary to Government (Urban) seeking for immediate action to promote him, more so, since he was due to retire from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31/05/2016. Simultaneously, the respondent approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 16132/2016, which was disposed of as per Annexure A3 verdict dated 29/04/2016 directing to promote the employee, if he was otherwise eligible and entitled, in accordance with the norms, without delay. Such a direction was given, taking note of the fact that the petitioner/applicant was due to retire from service on 31/05/2016.