IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2008 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11209 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ G.SUKUMARI AMMA, SALES SUPERVISOR, KERALA STATE HANDLOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.SASIKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KERALA STATE HANDLOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD, KANNUR-1 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. REGIONAL MANAGER, KERALA STATE HANDLOOM DEVELOPMENT, CORPORATION LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SC SRI. E.K.NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).11209/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner commenced service in the first respondent, Corporation, as Sales Supervisor and is aggrieved that she continues in the same cadre for a period of 24 years. Going by the recruitment rules, further promotion must have been effected to the post of Showroom Manager, then Assistant Regional Manager and Regional Manager. Petitioner submits that by time bound Grade promotion, salary now drawn by the petitioner is almost equivalent to that of the Regional Manager and therefore even if cadre promotion is given to the petitioner, it may not entail additional financial liability for the Corporation. There is no reason why such promotion should not be granted, contends the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.K.Sasikumar and the learned Standing Counsel for the W.P.(C).11209/2008 2 Corporation who appeared on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. 3. Petitioner's contentions are contained in Ext.P6 representation which is pending before the Managing Director. In my view, Corporation ought to pay serious attention to it and if there is no other factor which stands in the way of cadre promotion being effected, appropriate decision ought to be taken to proceed with such promotion essentially taking note of the fact that the cadre promotion as such in the case of the petitioner may not entail any additional financial commitment, in so far as the Corporation is concerned. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P6 representation, take appropriate decision thereon and proceed with the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs