IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18756 of 2010(T) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ B.RAVEENDRANATH, "ARAMANA" P.O.MEPPAYIL, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, NOW WORKING AS ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PANJAYATH DEPT. AT PARAPPANANGADI PANCHAYATH, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.VATHSALAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPT.OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No18756 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 16th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner's main grievance is regarding Ext.P8, by which according to him, his juniors have been promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineers in the LSGD Department. However, what is noticed is that prior to Ext.P8, when Ext.P4 provisional seniority list was published, the petitioner objected to the seniority assigned to him by filing Ext.P5. That was rejected, against which, he has filed Ext.P7 appeal before the 1st respondent. 2. Ext.P7 is sill pending and it is during the pendency of Ext.P7 that temporary promotions are ordered by Ext.P8. Therefore, what is required to be done first is to settle the controversy regarding the seniority, which can be given a quietus only if Ext.P7 is decided and if order on Ext.P7 necessitates, the respondents will have to review Ext.P8 also appropriately. 3. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7, giving the WP(C) No.18756/2010 -2- petitioner an opportunity of hearing. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of production of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that depending upon the out come of Ext.P7, if necessary, orders reviewing Ext.P8 shall also be passed. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg