IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2011 / 19TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 8869 of 2011(G) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- S.GOPAKUMAR, ARTIST, OFFICE OF CHIEF ARCHITECT, PWD, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, VIKAS BHAVAN.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-15. BY ADVS. SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PANAMPALLI NAGAR) SRI.LUIZ GODWIN D'COUTH SRI.K.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01. 2. CHIEF ARCHITECT, PWD, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, VIKAS BHAVAN.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-15. BY BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO.8869/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF ORDER DATED 27/07/99 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF LETTER DATED 22/12/2008 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF ORDER DATED 01/03/2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 02/02/2011. P5: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 29/07/2011. P6: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD ACCEPTING THE REPRESENTATION BY THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 8869 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th October, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as an Artist under the second respondent since 1-3-1989. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to be promoted as Architectural Head Draftsman. He has 21 years experience as an Artist. The Kerala Architectural State Service Rules and the Kerala Architectural Subordinate Service Special Rules are proposed to be amended, incorporating qualifications for the said promotions. However, without effecting such amendment certain promotions have been made. The juniors of the petitioner who have got such promotion are enjoying the benefits thereof while petitioner is denied the same. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 representation, which is pending before the second respondent. The petitioner seeks the issue of appropriate directions for an early disposal of Ext.P4. 2. I have heard the learned Govt. Pleader also. 3. Since the grievances of the petitioner are before the second respondent in Ext.P4 representation, it is not necessary for me to consider the merits of the contentions raised, at this stage. WPC 8869/2011 2 It is sufficient that Ext.P4 is directed to be considered and disposed of on an early date. 4. In the above circumstances this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner evidenced herein by Ext.P4 in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the concerned authority, for compliance. Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj P.S.to Judge WPC 8869/2011 3