IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2010 / 14TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 2750 of 2007(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. T.A.JOSEPH, DRIVER, 2513, STATE WATER TRANSPORT DEAPRTMENT, KALAVAM, ALAPPUZHA. 2. K.K.JOSEPH, DRIVER, 2205 STATE WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, PULINKUNNU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERRALA, WATER TRANSPORT DEPARMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR, STATE WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT (ADMINISTRATION), STATE WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, ALAPPUZHA. 4. KERALA PUBLI SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU, GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC FOR PSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.2750 of 2007 (B) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 4th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are Laskers, aspiring to be promoted to the post of Boat Driver/Boat Master. According to the petitioners, the posts of Boat Driver/Boat Master are to be filled up in the ratio of 4:1 by direct recruitment and promotion. It is stated that in 2001 several vacancies were filled up by direct recruitment, but only in 2005, promotions including that of their's were effected. On this basis, the petitioners claim that they should also be given promotion retrospectively with effect from 2001, when appointments were made by direct recruitment. 2. If as a matter of fact, the petitioners have a claim of retrospectivity to their promotions, the first thing they should do is to move the competent authority in the Department. This has not been done and therefore, this writ petition is premature. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed representations before the 2nd respondent. WP(C) No.2750/2007 -2- Therefore, leaving it it open to the petitioners to pursue the representations, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg