IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2010 / 17TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20512 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- R.S.ROSSMILON DANIEL, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DISTRIC T PANCHAYATH'S OFFICE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT.LOCAL SELF-GOVT. DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001. 2. M.K.SASEENDRAN, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, COCHIN CORPORATION, COCHIN-17. 3. RAJU MATHEW, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, O/O.THE CHIEF ENGINEER, LSGD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 6 95 001. MR.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No.20512 of 2010 (L) -------------------------- Dated, this the 8th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an Executive Engineer in the LSGD aspiring promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer. According to the petitioner, in the select list that was published on 09/06/2010, his name was not included, and on the other hand, his juniors were promoted. It is with this grievance, the writ petition is filed. 2. From the pleadings, it would appear that it is because the petitioner's probation was not declared that he was not considered for promotion. Dealing with similar grievances raised, this Court disposed of WP(C) No.18433/2010 and connected cases by judgment dated 16/06/2010 with the following directions:- “4. Since the facts are as above, though their reversion cannot be faulted, fact remains that for not regularising their promotions and not declaring satisfactory completion of their probation, they are made to suffer and their juniors are promoted. In the circumstances, their grievances can be redressed only if their cases are considered for regularising their promotions and for declaring their probation and on that basis they are considered for regular promotion to the posts of Superintending Engineer and WP(C) No.20512/2010 -2- Executive Engineer, as the case may be. Though the learned Government Pleader seeks six months' time for completing the aforesaid process, I feel the time sought is too long and can be of prejudice to the petitioners. Having regard to the submissions made by both sides, I direct that the respondents shall complete the aforesaid entire process as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of writ petition.” 3. In this writ petition also, as non-consideration of the petitioner for promotion is for the reason of non-declaration of the petitioner's probation, this writ petition will stand disposed of with the directions as contained in paragraph 4 of the judgment dated 16/06/2010 in WP(C) No.18433/2010 and connected case, extracted above. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the respondents for compliance. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg