IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2008 / 20TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 20945 of 2008(R) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS : -------------------- 1. DR.E.V. BALAGOPAL, VETERINARY SURGEON, VETERINARY DISPENSARY PANANGAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. DR.A. SHAHUL HAMID, VETERINARY SURGEON, VETERINARY DISPENSARY, THANNITHODU, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN RESPONDENTS : ---------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, THE CONVENOR, HIGHER DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE IN ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R. SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).20945/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 11th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners are Veterinary Surgeons. While so, after declaration of their probation, they had entered on leave without allowance for taking up employment abroad. They have re-joined duty in December 2007 and March 2008. They are entitled to be considered for promotion against the vacancies, in the post of Assistant Director, which are either lying vacant on the date of their re-joining duty or which arise thereafter, it is contended. But they are not being considered for promotion. It is further contended that though the names of the petitioners were forwarded by the Director, they were not placed before the DPC. They have approached the Government vide Exts.P4 and P5. 2. In my view, if the petitioners are not considered by the DPC, and their juniors are considered, it would amount to a case of supercession of the petitioners. In such an event, Exts.P4 and P5 may be considered as W.P.(C).20945/2008 2 statutory objection against the select list in terms of Rule 28(b)(1)(8) of K.S & S.S.R. But if the select list has not been published, requests pending in Exts.P4 and P5 may be treated as requests before the Government for appropriate action, to forward the names of the petitioners to the DPC, or any adhoc DPC that may be convened for the post in question. At any rate, orders on Exts.P4 and P5 may be passed, after hearing the petitioners, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs