IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2008 / 8TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 35360 of 2007(H) ------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- P.M.SUDHAKARAN, ASST. MANAGER, KERALA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., THALAPUZHA P.O., MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD. BY ADV. SMT.S.KARTHIKA SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.M.R.ANISON SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI SRI.T.R.RAJESH RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. KERALA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM 686 003. 2. DPC FOR PROMOTION TO THE POST OF MANAGER, KERALA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SRI.E.K.VIJAYAN, KARAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM. 3. A.RAJU, MANAGER, KERALA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, HEAD OFFICE, KOTTAYAM- 686 003. 4. C.S.RAJU, MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KERALA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, MAYYANNUR SUB UNIT, KOTHAMANGALAM P.O., TRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. K.G.JOSEPH, MANAGER, KERALA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, THALAPUZHA P.O., MANANTHAVADY, WAYANADU. 6. P.GANGADHARAN NAIR, MANAGER, KERALA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, SUB UNIT III ANAKULAM, CHOZHIYAKODE P.O., KULATHUPUZHA VIA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, 7. K.K.USIF, MANAGER, KERALA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, GAVI DIVISION, GAVI P.O., VANDIPERIYAR VIA. 8. THE DIRECTOR, VIGILANCE AND ANTI- CORRUPATION, BUREAU, TRIVANDRUM-695 033. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI BEJOY CHANDRAN SRI.V.G.ARUN SC FOR KFDC SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 35360 of 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 28th January, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner who is working as Assistant Manager in the 1st respondent Corporation contends that he is eligible for promotion to the post of Manager in the Corporation. According to him, there are eight posts of Manager in the 1st respondent Corporation. The 2nd respondent- Departmental Promotion Committee met on 15.2.2007 and prepared a select list. The only reason for not including the petitioner is the pendency of the vigilance case, as is evident from Exhibit P1. Select list was operated, as evidenced by Exhibit P2 order of promotion. Respondents 3 to 7 who are admittedly juniors to the petitioner have been promoted , petitioner contends. Petitioner submits that supersession was not intimated to him nevertheless Exhibit P3 representation is submitted. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent Corporation and a statement has been filed by the Government. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner Smt.Seemandini W.P ( C) No. 35360 of 2007 2 submits that the petitioner is due to retire on 31.12.2008, going by the retirement age as currently prescribed, though there is a proposal for enhancement of retirement age from 55 to 58. Be that as it may, the only aspect to be considered is the nature of the direction to be issued to the Government as regards the finalization of the vigilance case pending against the petitioner as VC 8/05/IDK. In the statement filed by the 8th respondent, it is mentioned as follows: “The investigation of the case in VC8/05/IDK of Vigilance Police Station, Idukki is almost completed and the Factual Report is under preparation”. 3. Taking note of the above, after hearing the counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 8th respondent to submit a final factual report before the Government within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Thereupon, the Government shall take a final decision on the factual report so submitted by the Director, within two months thereafter. If the Director makes a report for proceeding with the vigilance case against W.P ( C) No. 35360 of 2007 3 the petitioner and the Government accepts the same, the petitioner’s claim for promotion can be taken up only after completion of the vigilance case. On the other hand, if the ultimate decision of the Government is not to proceed against the petitioner in the vigilance case, the claim for promotion shall be taken up by the 1st respondent and appropriate orders passed taking note of Exhibit P1 select list, without further delay. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 35360 of 2007 4 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER 25th May, 2007