IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2011 / 4TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 824 of 2011(C) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SAJEEV.M.S., AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. SURENDRAN, EXCISE DUTY INSPECTOR, RUBBER BOARD SUB-OFFICE, BANGALORE, PIN-560079. RESIDING AT MAPPILASSERIL, MARARIKULAM NORTH.P.O., ALAPUZHA, PIN-688549. BY ADVS. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY SRIT.R.MOHANAKUMAR SRI.G.SHYAM RAJ RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. RUBBER BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, RUBBER BOARD, COLLECTORATE PO, KOTTAYAM-686 002. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, RUBBER BOARD, COLLECTORATE.P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 002. R2 BY ADVS. SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN, SC SRI.BINU MATHEW SRI.TERRY V.JAMES SRI.B.J.JOHN PRAKASH SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.824/2011-C ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 24th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is presently working as an Excise Duty Inspector under the first respondent-Rubber Board. The main prayer in the writ petition is to grant a declaration that the petitioner is eligible to be considered for promotion in the existing vacancy of Assistant Director (Excise) in terms of the prevailing Ext.P3 recruitment rules. The petitioner also challenges Ext.P1 memorandum dated 25/11/2010 which is in reply to the request made by the petitioner for granting promotion. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Rubber Board. It is pointed out that under Clause 19 of the Rubber Board Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1961, Ext.P1 can be challenged in an appeal before the Central Government. It is further pointed out that the amendment of the Recruitment Rules is pending consideration before the Central Government. In that view of the matter, as the petitioner is having an effective remedy to challenge the Order Ext.P1 W.P.(C). No.824/2011 -:2:- before the Central Government, the petitioner can file an appeal as per the procedure prescribed under Rule 24 of the Rules. Therefore, leaving open the remedy of the petitioner to file the appeal, the writ petition is closed. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms \\TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE