IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2011 / 3RD SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).NO. 20162 OF 2011(U) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- D. VELAYUDHAN, S/O.P. DAMODARAN, AGED 50 YEARS, EMPIRE VIHAR, (SADASIVAVILASAM) NADOORKOLLA, AMARAVILA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 112. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENSE, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION, AERONAUTICAL DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHMENT, C.V. RAMAN NAGAR POST, P.B.NO.9318 BANGLORE, PIN – 560 093. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, DIRECTORATE OF PERSONNEL, MINISTRY OF DEFENSE, B, WING, SENA BHAVAN, D.H.Q P.O., NEW DELHI, PIN - 110 001. 3. THE DIRECTOR, DEFENSE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION, AERONAUTICAL DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHMENT NEW THIPPASANDRA POST, BANGALORE – 560 075. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASG OF INDIA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).NO. 20162 OF 2011(U) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DATED 17/12/1990 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION, MINSTRY OF DEFENSE BY PROMOTING THE PETITIONER FROM TRADES MAN B TO THE POST OF TRADES MAN A. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORIGINAL COMMUNICATION DATED 31/10/1993 ISSUED BY THE MINSTER OF STATE FOR DEFENSE TO K.RAMAMURTHY WITH REQUEST TO THE TRANSFER OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 26/04/1994 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR TO SCIENTIFIC ADVISER TO THE MINSTER OF DEFENSE AND DIRECTOR GENERAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 20/10/2003 ISSUED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER LABOUR BUREAU WITH REGARDS TO THE VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE DEFENSE SERVICE CIVIL PENSION ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPLE CDA (PENSION ALLAHABAD). EXT.P6: COPY OF THE APPEAL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DIRECTOR DEFENSE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION, BANGALORE. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 24/01/2011, ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR MINISTRY OF DEFENSE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.20162 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner voluntarily retired from service while working as a Tradesman Grade- A under the Aeronautical Development Establishment. This Writ Petition has been filed mainly with the prayer to declare that the petitioner is entitled to get further promotion to the post of Technical Officer Grade- A in the service of the third respondent Department and to direct to effect such promotion to the petitioner symbolically. The further prayers are for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant all the monetary benefits due to the petitioner consequent on the symbolic promotion to be effected in the above post and also to disburse the arrears consequent on the difference in the scale of pay. The claim of the petitioner is that he was entitled to get promotion as Technical Officer Grade-A with effect from 31.10.2003. In this context, it is to be noted that the petitioner applied for voluntary retirement from service and got permission as per Ext.P4 order dated 20.10.2003. His application for voluntary retirement was accepted with effect from W.P.(C) NO.20162 of 2011 2 31.10.2003. In the light of Ext.P4, I am of the view that the petitioner is not legally entitled to claim promotion with effect from 31.10.2003. That apart, the petitioner has not prosecuted the said claim, if any, at the appropriate time. If at all he was having any such claim, he should have pursued the same at the appropriate time. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P6 representation on 28.9.2010 and the same was rejected as per Ext.P7 dated 24.1.2011. It is a case wherein the doctrine of latches and limitations are applied. The petitioner cannot rely on the decision in Ext.P7 to resurrect a stale claim, if at all there was one. In view of the said position, I am of the view that there is no merit in the Writ Petition and accordingly, it is dismissed. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.20162 of 2011 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.20162 of 2011 4