IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2008 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 18097 of 2008(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.PADMANABHAN, WORKING AS LIBRARIAN GRADE - IV, NEHRU ARTS & SCIENCE COLLEGE, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH SMT.V.SETHUKUTTY AMMA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR, COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE MANAGER, NEHRU ARTS & SCIENCE COLLEGE, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 18097 OF 2008 D -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th June, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as Librarian Grade IV in Nehru Arts and Science College, Kanhangad. It is stated that the petitioner commenced his service as last grade staff with effect from 7.1.1983. He was subsequently promoted as Specimen Collector on 1.12.2000, which was approved by the first respondent, the Director of Collegiate Education. Later, the petitioner was placed as Library Attender from 30.4.2002 to 31.5.2005, against one retirement vacancy on work arrangement. His appointment as Library Attender was not approved in view of the ban imposed by the Government as per Government Order dated 5.12.2001. The petitioner was appointed as Librarian Grade IV with effect from 1.6.2005 in the retirement vacancy of Sri.N.Rajendran Nair, as per proceedings dated 31.5.2005. The proposal for appointment was forwarded to the first respondent. The first respondent passed Ext.P4 order rejecting the proposal on the ground that there was no sanctioned post to which the petitioner could be appointed. Challenging Ext.P4, the petitioner has filed Ext.P9 representation dated 22.4.2008 before the Government. In Ext.P9, the petitioner has stated that the service of Librarian is indispensable in the College, considering the volume of work and the number of students. It is also pointed out in Ext.P9 that the W.P.(C) NO.18097 OF 2008 :: 2 :: petitioner is due to retire on 30.11.2008. It is prayed in Ext.P9 that the appointment of the petitioner as Librarian Grade IV may be approved. Ext.P9 is pending disposal. 2. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following: “i) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ calling for the records and quash Exhibits P4; and P5, P6 and P7, to the extent the appointment of the petitioner is not permitted therein. ii) To declare that the appointment of the petitioner as Librarian Grade IV is liable to be approved and regularized. iii) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as per Exhibit P1, and grant the monetary benefits flowing therefrom within a time frame. iv) To issue any other writ or order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. As an interim relief, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the second respondent to dispose of Ext.P9 representation. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, for the time being, he is pressing for the relief of an expeditious disposal of Ext.P9 representation. W.P.(C) NO.18097 OF 2008 :: 3 :: 4. Learned Government Pleader submitted that Ext.P9 will be disposed of by the Government without delay. In the manner in which I propose to dispose of the Writ Petition, I do not think it is necessary to issue notice to the third respondent. Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 and 2. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P9 dated 22.4.2008, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of two months. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition before the second respondent to facilitate a proper and effective disposal of Ext.P9 representation. It is made clear that the disposal of the Writ Petition will not stand in the way of the petitioner pressing for the other reliefs made in the Writ Petition at appropriate stage. The petitioner shall send a copy of the judgment to the third respondent by registered post and shall produce proof of the same before the second respondent without delay. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/