IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 11TH APRIL 2011 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10617 of 2011(B) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ P.P.SIMON, CONDUCTOR SPECIAL GRADE K.S.R.T.C CORPORATION, SULTAN BATHERY. BY SRI.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADVS. SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL SRI.V.MADHUSUDHANAN SRI.T.ISSAC RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, (KSRTC, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 023. 2. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION) KSRTC,TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 023. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC KSRTC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.10617/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.VLD3/028707/2001 DTD. 28.10.2010 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (VIGILANCE) KSRTC. P2:- COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD. 25.11.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.D 18.12.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITINER TO THE IST RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.PL.10/002001/2010 DTD. 7.1.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 17.2.2011 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL TO THE IST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 10617 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Special Grade Conductor in the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. While he was working as Selection Grade Conductor, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him and that ultimately culminated in the order of removal from the service, on 6.12.2005. He had unsuccessfully attempted an appeal and a revision against the said order. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing WP(C)No.1442/2006. It was disposed of by judgment dated 19.8.2009 The impugned orders were set aside on the ground that no proper enquiry was conducted before passing the aforesaid penalty. The petitioner was directed to be reinstated and the Corporation was granted the liberty to continue and complete the disciplinary proceedings, in accordance with law. Subsequently, the petitioner was reinstated as Conductor Special Grade on 5.11.2009. The Executive Director (Vigilance), thereupon, completed the disciplinary proceedings WPC.10617/2011 : 2 : and passed final orders on 28.8.2010 as per Ext.P1. As per the said order the punishment of barring the next increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect was imposed on the petitioner. The period during which the petitioner was kept out of service on account of suspension and then removal from service were ordered to be regularized as eligible leave as per Ext.P1. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P1 petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal. The said appeal is still pending. While the petitioner was under orders of removal from service some of his juniors were promoted to the post of Station Master in the year 2007 and then, as Inspectors on 24.4.2008. According to the petitioner, he was not promoted as he was not in service at the time of such promotions. After his reinstatement the petitioner was imposed with only the punishment of barring of next increment for one year with cumulative effect and as per Ext.P4 the period during which he was kept out of service was treated as regular duty. In the said circumstances, at least after Ext.P1 he should have been promoted as Station Master against the next arising vacancy with notional assignment of date of promotion from the date WPC.10617/2011 : 3 : on which the juniors were given the said promotion, it is contended. Aggrieved by the non-consideration of his claims in that regard the petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 representation. As per Ext.P3 he requested for promotion as Station Master and then as, Inspector. Ext.P3 representation is also pending before the first respondent. During the pendency of Ext.P3 the second respondent granted promotion to another batch of his juniors, as Station Masters vide Ext.P4. It is in the said circumstances that this writ petition has been filed mainly with a prayer to consider and pass orders on Exts.P2 and P3 and also for a direction to the respondents to promote him as Station Master and then, as Inspector with effect from the dates on which his juniors mentioned in Ext.P3 were given such promotions. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Evidently, on being aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of punishment the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 which is a statutory appeal. Admittedly, the said appeal is still pending before the first respondent. Ext.P3 representation submitted by the WPC.10617/2011 : 4 : petitioner carrying requests for promotion as Station Master and then as, Inspector with effect from the dates on which such promotions were granted to his juniors mentioned therein, is also pending before the first respondent. In view of the pendency of Exts.P2 and P3 before the first respondent and also taking note of the fact that the first respondent is bound to pass orders thereon, I am of the view that it is unnecessary, at this stage, to consider the various contentions raised by the petitioner in this writ petition. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P2 and P3 expeditiously and in accordance with law. This shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge