IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2008 / 31ST ASHADHA 1930 WA.No. 1492 of 2008(E) --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.32461/2006 DATED 20/08/2007. .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- DR.BEENA USMAN, W/O.IBRAHIM SHARAFUDHEEN, AGED 51 YEARS, LECTURER, GOVERNMENT HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED, ADV. SRI.K.E.HAMZA. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL AND CONTROLLING OFFICER, GOVERNMENT HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALAN, LECTURER, (READER IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PHYSIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY GOVERNMENT HOMOEPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVACIS. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A.No.1492 OF 2008 and C.M.Appl.No.660 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated 22nd July, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . The appellant/petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer and her probation was declared only in january, 2006. Third respondent was appointed as a Lecturer and his probation in the cadre of Lecturer was declared on 7th August, 1998. That shows that the appellant was much junior to the third respondent. A post of Reader was created by G.O. (MS)No.27/2005 dated February 2, 2005. The third respondent who was eligible and included in Ext.P2 select list in 2005 was promoted as Reader, but, he relinquished the promotion for one year. Meanwhile, appellant's probation was declared and she became eligible for promotion on 13.1.2006. Contention of the appellant is that she should have been promoted immediately though her name was not included in Ext.P2 as at the time of preparation of Ext.P2 select list she was not qualified. In the above circumstances, if any qualified junior was in the select list (Ext.P2), he could have been promoted when third respondent relinquished the promotion. But, there was no junior in the select list to be promoted and nobody was eligible for promotion when the third respondent relinquished the promotion and when one year relinquishment period was over, third respondent assumed the charge in W.A.1492/2008 2 the promoted post. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the scope of Rule 28 of KS &SSR, learned single Judge found that appellant cannot seek for automatic regular promotion when she became qualified to be promoted without being included in the select list. Even otherwise, learned Judge also noticed that such a claim was not made in the earlier decision in the writ petition filed by the appellant resulting in Ext.P9 judgment. Apart from the above, we note that this appeal was filed with a delay of 247 days. The impugned judgment was pronounced in the presence of the advocate in open court and long delay of 247 days is not explained. Mere mis-communication is not a ground for condoning the long delay. Contention of the appellant is that after hearing the case, judgment was reserved and then later only the judgment was pronounced. It is also not correct. Judgment was pronounced in the open court, immediately after the matter was heard. No satisfactory reasons are also stated for condoning the long delay. Both delay condonation petition and appeal are dismissed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE tks