IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2011 / 31ST SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 12338 of 2010(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- J.SUJATHA, TRAINING OFFICER, RELATED INSTRUCTION CENTRE, CHAKKAI, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SRI.T.R.SADEESAN SRI.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LABOUR AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF TRAINING, INDUSTRIAL TRAINING DEPARTMENT, THYKKAD, TRIVANDRUM - 14. BY G.P.SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 12338 of 2010(N) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 16.12.1985 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE SENIORITY LIST OF GROUP INSTRUCTORS ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT, DATED 28.10.2005. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE SENIORITY LIST OF GROUP INSTRUCTORS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.12.2007. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.4.2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1.12.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.3.2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSAL DATED 1.2.2011. // TRUE COPY // TKS P.S. TO JUDGE C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.12338 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated 22nd August, 2011 JUDGMENT When this matter is taken up for consideration the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied with a direction to consider and to pass orders on Ext.P7 by the first respondent. The petitioner is working as Training Officer in the cadre of Vice Principal in the Industrial Training Department. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks for a declaration that Rule 4(2) of Ext.P1 rules for special recruitment is illegal and unconstitutional and for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash Exts.P2 and P3 to the extent they deny seniority to the petitioner from the date of advice by the Public Service Commission. The further prayer is for a declaration that the petitioner is eligible and entitled to seniority in the cadre of Group Instructor from the date of advice by the Public Service Commission with all consequential benefits. Exts.P2, P3 and P6 are also under challenge to the extent they deny seniority to the petitioner from the date of advice by the Public Service Commission as Group Instructor. The contention of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent has recommended the claim of the petitioner for consideration of the first respondent as per Ext.P7. Ext.P7 is dated 1.2.2011. It is only on WP(C).No.12338/2010 2 account of the pendency of this writ petition that Ext.P7 was not taken up for consideration. In view of the said submission made on behalf of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of, without making any observation as to the merits of the contentions raised in this writ petition as also in Ext.P7, directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P7 and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that person/persons, if any, likely to be affected in case of a favourable consideration of Ext.P7, shall also be put on notice. It is made clear that the other issues raised by the petitioner in this writ petition are left open. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS