IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2008 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1930 OP.No. 25625 of 1998(A) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. NINAN VARGHESE, P.C.1170, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION. 2. P.K.VIJAYAN, P.C.1174, VECHUCHIRA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. RADHAKRISHNA KURUP, P.C.1175, VIGILANCE ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. P.T.RAVEENDRAN, P.C.1178, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION. 5. VENUNATHAN, P.C.1186, KODUMAN POLICE STATION. 6. SAJEED MOHAMMED, P.C.1201, VIGILANCE ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU. 7. KRISHNAKUMAR, P.C.1203, KAKKAD POLICE STATION. 8. SUBAIR KHAN, P.C.1212, PATHANAMTHITTA. 9. RAVEENDRAN NAIR, P.C.1213, VIGILANCE ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, PATHANAMTHITTA. 10. RAJU.M.THOMAS, P.C.1214, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION. 11. SYANI.C.P., P-1247, THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION. BY ADV. SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI (SR.) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., H.M.C.DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. SURESH KUMAR, H.C.924, ARANMULA POLICE STATION, ARANMULA. 4. BHASKARAN, P.C.1088, PERUMPATTY POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. ADDL. RESPONDENT: 5. MR.T.P.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, HEAD CONSTABLE NO.924, VIGILANCE & ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, PATHANAMTHITTA. (ADDL. RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.12.4.2002 IN I.A. 16507/2002.) R1&2 BY G.P. SMT.SMITHA SRI.K.G.ANIL BABU FOR R4 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/06/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 36316 OF 2004 & WPC NO. 29395 OF 2004, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP NO.45032/1998, I.A. NOS.14353/2005, 15791/2007 & 3315/2008 IN O.P. NO.25625/1998 DISMISSED: 6.6.2008 SD/-(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DT.12.2.1996 ISSUED BY R2. P2: TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY SOME OF THE PETITIONERS BEFORE R2 DT.21.10.97. P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDIGNS DT.14.11.97 ISSUED BY R2 ALONG WITH RELEVANT PAGES OF THE SENIORITY LIST. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... O.P. No.25625 of 1998 & W.P.(C) Nos.29395 & 36316 of 2004 .................................................................... Dated this the 6th day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT All the three writ petitions are filed by Police Constables with the Local Police who have come from Kerala Armed Police Batalian from various Districts and allotted to the Districts of Ernakulam, Idukki and Pathanamthitta. The complaint by the petitioners is that while fixing their seniority as Police Constables in the Local Police, they have been superceded by juniors who came from the District Armed Reserve Camp. The Prayer in the writ petitions is to quash the seniority already fixed and fix the seniority afresh by taking into account the date on which petitioners and others joined the Local Police. It is stated that allotment to Local Police was made based on vacancy reported. Even though counsel for the petitioners specifically pointed out some instances where the petitioners were overlooked and preference given to juniors who came from Armed Reserve Camp, I do not think there is any need for this court to consider the relative claim of petitioners and contesting respondents because guidelines are issued by Division Bench judgments of this court vide Exts.P1 and P7 produced in W.P. NO.29395/2004. Petitioners have expressed 2 apprehension that inspite of the guidelines issued in the judgments, there is likelihood of denial of seniority again because some manipulations in records were stated to be made in Pathanamthitta and Idukki Districts. The contesting respondents have on the other hand submitted that irregularity is only an allegation. The seniority list in every District has to be finalised by the District Superintendent of Police or the Police Commissioner, as the case may be. Since there are already two judgments in the matter, I feel in order to avoid further controversy and litigation, it would be better the concerned Police Officer before finalising seniority take assistance from the Law Secretary, who is directed to co-ordinate in the matter on requisition by the District Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of directing the Commissioner of Police/Superintendent of Police to go through the judgments abovereferred, consider the relative claims of petitioners and the contesting respondents and others in service and prepare a draft seniority list and publish the same for aggrieved persons to file objection. Seniority list will be finalised after hearing the objections and in the light of the guidelines issued by this court in the two Division Bench judgments and based on current Rules of promotion. The Law Secretary will render assistance to the Superintendent of Police in interpreting the Rules and the judgments for the purpose of 3 fixation of seniority. The final list should be prepared within a period of three months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioners. As and when fresh list is finalised, the same will supercede all previous lists. The parties are free to produce other judgments of this court also which are not inconsistent with the two Division Bench judgments referred above. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms