IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1931 RP.No. 1128 of 2009(D) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.29072/2009 Dated 03/11/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS IN IA.13779/09/THIRD PARTIES ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. A.SHAJAHAN THANGAL, LABORATORY ASSISTANT,M.S.M.COLLEGE,KAYAMKULAM. 2. SANTHAKUMARY K.C., LABORATORY ASSISTANT,M.S.M.COLLEGE,KAYAMKULAM. 3. B.N.RAJENDRA KUMAR, LABORATORY ASSISTANT,M.S.M.COLLEGE,KAYAMKULAM. 4. M.Y.SALEENA, LIBRARY ASSISTANT,M.S.M.COLLEGE,KAYAMKULAM. 5. GEETHA BHAI, LAST GRADE SERVANT,M.S.M.COLLEGE,KAYAMKULAM. 6. M.ABDUL AKBAR, LABORATORY ASSISTANT,M.S.M.COLLEGE,KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------------- 1. VINOD KUMAR R., LAST GRADE SERVANT (HIGHER GRADE), M.S.M.COLLEGE,KAYAMKULAM. 2. MANAGER CUM SECRETARY, M.S.M.COLLEGE,KAYAMKULAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. RP.No. 1128 of 2009 -2- 4. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, VIKAS BHAVAN,P.M.G.JUNCTION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.T. MUHAMOOD THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: T.R RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- R.P. No.1128 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No. 29072 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 18th November,2009 O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioners, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the Management. 2. The issue is regarding the claim for promotion to the post of Herbarium Keeper. The review petitioners have got a case that they had filed an application for impleading in the writ petition and before the judgment was pronounced, they could not move the same. 3. In these circumstances, the review of the judgment has been sought. They are aggrieved by the direction to consider the claim of the writ petitioner alone for promotion. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the Management that the claims of everybody including the review petitioners will be considered in accordance with the Statute. Therefore, R.P. No.1128 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No. 29072 of 2009 2 the operative portion of the judgment is modified as the following:- There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take a decision on Ext.P2 as well as on the claim of the review petitioners or anybody else who is waiting for promotion in the particular post and decision will be taken in terms of the qualification prescribed as per the Statute within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The operative portion of the judgment will stand modified accordingly. Review petition is disposed of as above. T.R RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE ma R.P. No.1128 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No. 29072 of 2009 3 R.P. No.1128 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No. 29072 of 2009 4