IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2009 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34374 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- P.P.GEORGE, SENIOR AUDITOR OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR,THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, CO-OPERATION (C) DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARAIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE (LOWER) DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 34374 OF 2009 (N) ===================== Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Senior Inspector/Auditor in the Co-operative Department aspiring for promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar. He is aggrieved by his non inclusion in Exts.P2 and P3, the select list and the revised select list. He submitted Ext.P4 representation to the 1st respondent and even that did not evoke any response. Therefore, the writ petition is filed. 2. On instructions, learned Government Pleader submits that non inclusion of the petitioner was for the reason that he was accused No.3 in CC No.65/08 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Trichur. Even if he is an accused as claimed, petitioner should have been considered adopting the sealed cover proceedings. That does not seem to have been done. Further, it is now pointed out by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that in Crl.M.C. NO.954/09 filed by the petitioner against the proceedings against him in CC NO.65/08, this Court by judgment dated 9th of July, 2009 quashed the proceedings against him. Therefore that disqualification goes with the judgment of this WPC 34374/09 :2 : Court. In the light of this, petitioner is entitled to be considered for promotion. The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the respondents to convene the DPC and revise the select list in accordance with law. Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the judgment in Crl.M.C. NO.954/09 referred to above before the respondents for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp