IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2010 / 1ST SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 22875 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S):- ---------------------- K.S.MADHU SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (H.P) DIRECTORATE OF GROUND WATER, JALA VIJNANA BHAVAN AMBALAMUTTU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.MATHEW SUNNY SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR RESPONDENT(S) :- ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY WATER RESOURCES (GW) DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARAIT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -1 2. THE DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE (HIGHER) REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARAIT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -1 3. THE DIRECTOR, GROUND WATAR DEPARTMENT JALA VIJNANA BHAVAN, AMBALAMUKKU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -3 4. K.G.MADANAKRISHNAN, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER GROUND WATER DEPARTMENT, MEENANGADI PO, WAYANAD DISTRICT PIN 673 592 ADV. SRI.K.P.JUSTINE (KARIPAT) FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No.22875 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 23rd day of July 2010 J U D G M E N T Mr.K.P.Justine (Karipat) takes notice for respondent No.4. Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P5 recommendation of the 2nd respondent in its meeting held on 7.6.2010. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the 1st respondent to allow him to continue as Superintending Engineer until a vacancy in the said cadre arises. 2. The petitioner and 4th respondent were working in the category of Executive Engineers in the Ground Water Department. While so, select list for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer for the year 2009 was published by the Departmental Promotion Committee. At that time, a minor penalty proceedings were pending W.P.(C) No.22875 of 2010 -: 2 :- against the 4th respondent and therefore, his name was included in the select list only on provisional basis. In view of the above, petitioner was promoted to the post of Superintending Engineer on a temporary basis. Disciplinary proceedings against the 4th respondent has been finalized by imposing a minor penalty of barring one year increment without cumulative effect. 3. Thereafter, DPC in the meeting held on 7.6.2010 reviewed his case and Ext.P5 proceedings were issued. It has been stated in Ext.P5 thus :- “The departmental action initiated against Shri.K.G.Madhanakrishnan for supervisory lapses, on the basis of the recommendations of the vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, has been finalized by confirming the tentative decision taken to withhold one increment without cumulative effect vide Go.(Rt)No.1027/2009/WRD Dated 08/09/2009. Accountant General has informed that the minor penalty of with holding one increment without cumulative effect was imposed on Shri.K.G.Madhanakrishnan from 01/11/2009 to 31/01/2010. Departmental Promotion Committee (Higher) has reviewed the case in detail and found that only a W.P.(C) No.22875 of 2010 -: 3 :- minor penalty has been imposed on Shri.K.G.Madhanakrishnan, for Supervisory lapses and no other punishment were charged against him in his service. Also the committee took notice of that he was senior in service and age. Hence the committee decided to promote Shri.K.G.Madhanakrishnan, Executive Engineer to the post of Superintending Engineer for the vacancy of 2009, as per Note (ii) below sub rule (7) of Rule 28 b(1) of KS & SSR on a regular basis and also decided to revert Shri.K.S.Madhu, Superintending Engineer to Executive Engineer who was promoted temporarily.” 4. According to the petitioner since the period for which punishment has been imposed has not expired, the DPC could not have recommended him for his promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer. It is on this ground Ext.P5 is challenged. 5. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader, the matter is covered by Notes (i) and (ii) Rule 28 b(i)(7) of KS & SSR. Note (i), interalia provides that, “officers against departmental proceedings are taken for the imposition of a minor penalty may be included in the select list provisionally, if they are found suitable but for W.P.(C) No.22875 of 2010 -: 4 :- the pendency of disciplinary proceedings initiated against him.” Note (ii), interalia provides that, “if the officers against minor penalty proceedings were taken and provisionally included in the select list, are fully exonerated of the charges, their cases for promotion shall be considered.” It is further provided that “if the officers are not fully exonerated of the charges, the DPC may decide each case on its own merit.” 6. In so far as this case is concerned, the 4th respondent was not fully exonerated and as he was included in the select list on a provisional basis as provided in the Rules, his case was considered and the DPC decided his case on its own merit as is disclosed in Ext.P5. Ext.P5, minutes of the DPC extracted above shows that the DPC has on consideration of the case of the 4th respondent came to the conclusion that he is fit to be promoted to the post of Superintending Engineer. Therefore, Ext.P5 minutes of the DPC is fully in compliance with the provisions contained in Notes (i) and (ii) Rule 28 b(i)(7) of Part II of KS & SSR. In W.P.(C) No.22875 of 2010 -: 5 :- that view of the matter, there is nothing illegal in Ext.P5. Therefore the writ petition fails and dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. Jvt