IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2011 / 5TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20348 of 2011(P) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- VINODKUMAR.P.N., DRIVER POLICE CONSTABLE, PC H 1579, POLICE TELECOMMUNICATION, SUB UNIT, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS. SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH, SRI.V.SADASIVAN, SMT.SHALEENA RAJAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. A.J. VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.20348/2011-P: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE DISTRICT ORDER NO.931/03/P DTD. 20/09/2003 OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE DIPLOMA CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE PROPRIETOR OF BINDU GARAGE ON 19/11/2002. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 23/02/2006 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. L3-18326/2006 DTD. NIL 5.2006. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 23/07/2010 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION G.O.(P).NO.20/2011/HOME DTD. 24/01/2011. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 29/03/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE R.1. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE REMINDER DTD. 27/05/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.20348 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as Driver Police Constable in the Police Department. On finding that there is no promotional avenues in the said category, the petitioner requested for a category change as per Ext.P4. The said request of the petitioner was rejected as per Ext.P5. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 representation before the first respondent. In Ext.P8, the petitioner has voiced his grievances regarding the absence of promotional avenues in the category to which he belongs. According to the petitioner, even at the time of bringing into force of Ext.P7 sub rules, that particular question was not at all considered. It is in the said circumstances that the petitioner has submitted Ext.P8 representation for re-examination of the said issue. On account of the inaction on the part of the respondents on Ext.P8, Ext.P9 reminder was sent. It also did not yield any response from the respondents. It is in the said circumstances that this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. It is the settled position of law that the W.P.(C) NO.20348 of 2011 2 matters pertaining to the creation of post, abolition of posts, creation of promotional avenues etc. are matters falling within the domain of executive government and therefore, this court cannot issue a direction for creation of such promotional avenues. At the same time, there cannot be any doubt with respect to the position that the endeavour of the authorities competent, in this matter, should always be to create promotional avenues for the employees to avoid stagnation of employees in a particular post for unduly long period as it would create frustration among the employees. I am of the considered view that since the petitioner has already voiced his grievances in Ext.P8, it is only appropriate for the government to look into the grievances raised by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. This writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of . (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.20348 of 2011 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.20348 of 2011 4