IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2009 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1931 WA.No. 921 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.28791/2008 Dated 03/04/2009 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS 1 & 2 IN THE WPC ------------------------------------------ 1. C.A.PADMANABHAN, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, CIVIL CIRCLE, MEENCUT, CHITHIRAPURAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. N.ANILKUMAR, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, INVESTIGATION DIVISION, PADINJARETHARA, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.MATHEW SUNNY RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 AND ADDL.3RD RESPONDENT ------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD (K.S.E.B IN SHORT), REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (H.R.M) K.S.E.B, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SAJI VARGHESE, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (CIVIL), K.S.E.BOARD, CIVIL CIRCLE, PALLOM, KOTTAYAM. ADV.SRI.ASHOK M CHERIAN FOR R1 & R2. SRI.ELVIN PETER FOR R3. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.A. NO.921 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------- Dated 25th May, 2009. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellants challenge an interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P(C) No.28791/2008. At present, the appellants are working as Assistant Executive Engineers. They were appointed to the post of Assistant Engineer in the 10% quota reserved for Board employees, who were having Degree in Engineering. Their promotion was provisional. The appellants apprehend, in view of the seniority list published in the cadre of Assistant Engineers, they will be reverted. Therefore, the writ petition was filed. Initially, there was an interim order against their reversion. Now, after hearing the Electricity Board and also taking into account the direction issued by this Court in Ext.R3(a) judgment, the stay is vacated. So, the appeal is filed, challenging the said order. 2. Normally, a Writ Appeal is not maintainable against an interim order. A larger Bench of this Court in K.S.Das v. State of Kerala [1992(2) WA 921/2009 2 KLT 358(FB)] has laid down the conditions for entertaining a Writ Appeal against an interim order. Going by the principles laid down therein, we find that no ground has been made out in this Writ Appeal to maintain the challenge against the interim order. Therefore, the appeal is not maintainable. The appellants may move the learned Single Judge for early hearing of the Writ Petition. It is also ordered that the reversion, if any, of the appellants will be subject to the final orders in the Writ Petition. Subject to the above observation, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. nm/