IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2007 / 20TH ASHADHA 1929 WA.No. 2315 of 2004(B) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.14807/2000 Dated 07/10/2004 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER --------------------- K.G.SUGUNA PRASAD,TECHNICAL ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES (TRAINING), ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SMT.J.SHEEBA MARIAM SMT.K.NANDINI RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FISHERIES AND PORTS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. Addl. 3. K.J.PRASANNA KUMAR, AGED 35, NOW WORKING AS ASSISTANT OF FISHERIES, IDUKKI. Addl. 4. K.I. RAVEENDRAN, AGED 43, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, FISH FARMERS DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THRISSUR. Addl. 5. S. AJAYAN, 42 YEARS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, PATHANAMTHITTA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. Are impleaded as additional respondents 3,4 & 5 vide order dtd.17.10.05 in IA 2401/05 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVASIS SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.S.RAMESH THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/07/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------- W.A.No.2315 of 2004 ---------------------------------------- Dated 16th March, 2010 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant is the writ petitioner. He was a Technical Assistant in the Fisheries Department at the time of filing the Writ Petition. His next promotion post in the direct line of promotion is Superintendent. He is also eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Research Officer/Marine Survey Officer/Fresh Water Biologist. But, for that, he should have minimum five years' research experience in any of the institutions of the Fisheries Department. Further, there is a ratio of 2:1 between Technical Assistants and Research Assistants for promotion to the post of Research Officer. The petitioner, claiming promotion to the post of Superintendent or Research Officer preferred Ext.P4 representation. The said representation was considered and rejected by the Director of Fisheries by Ext.P5. In Ext.P5, it was stated that his turn as per the seniority has not reached for promotion to those posts. Challenging Ext.P5 and seeking consequential reliefs the Writ Petition was filed. The respondents filed a counter affidavit. In the said affidavit, an additional ground was taken to support denial of promotion to him, that was, he did not have the requisite research W.A.No.2315/2004 2 experience of five years prescribed for promotion to the post of Research Officer. The respondents admitted that research institutions under the Fisheries Department were transferred to the Kerala Agricultural University in 1979. Only some applied research is being now conducted in the Department. Research Assistants working in that field are treated as having research experience for the purpose of promotion to the post of Research Officer, it was submitted. The learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides, upheld the contention of the respondents that the appellant/writ petitioner did not have the requisite research experience and therefore, he cannot be promoted as Research Officer. Challenging the said decision of the learned Single Judge, the present Writ Appeal is filed. 2. We heard the learned counsel on both sides. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that since there is no research in the Department now, the provision for five years' research experience for promotion to the post of Research Officer is redundant and unworkable. Further, he has worked for six years from 1989 to 1995 in the Shrimp Hatchery under the Fisheries Department and therefore, he should be taken as one having the necessary research experience. So, the decision of the learned Single Judge may be set aside, it was prayed. W.A.No.2315/2004 3 3. We heard the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. He took us through the provisions in the Special Rules and brought to our notice that the appellant can get promotion as Superintendent without research experience. If he wants to get promotion as Research Officer, he has to wait according to his turn and also should acquire research experience in the applied research field under the Department. But, a Technical Assistant is not working in that field of research and therefore, he is unqualified for promotion as Research Officer, it is submitted. We find nothing wrong with Ext.P5. It only states that the petitioner has to wait for his turn, according to the ratio for promotion as Research Officer. But, in the counter affidavit, it was pointed out that the petitioner did not have the necessary research experience and only those who are working in applied research field under the Fisheries Department will be held as having research experience. The learned Single Judge, as mentioned earlier, accepted the said contention and dismissed the Writ Petition. We find that the above stand taken by the respondents or its affirmation by the learned Single Judge cannot be said to be unreasonable or unjustified. So long as the Special Rules are there, the petitioner can aspire for promotion as Research Officer, if only he has research experience. Since he does W.A.No.2315/2004 4 not have research experience, his claim was rightly repelled. He cannot be treated on par with persons working in the applied research field as Research Assistants. We are told that the appellant was later promoted as Superintendent and still later as Assistant Director of Fisheries. For the reasons mentioned above, we see no ground to interfere with the judgment under appeal. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR Judge P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge TKS