IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2011 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WA.No. 1685 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.23525/2006 Dated 11/10/2011 .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER ------------------------ N. SUDHARMAN, L.D CLERK, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.KUNJHIKANNAN SRI.S.K.MADHU RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANSORT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. SMT. K. MEERA. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag. CJ & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.A.No.1685 OF 2011 ......................................................................... Dated this the 20th December, 2011 J U D G M E N T MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag. CJ. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant. 2. We have gone through the judgment of the learned Single Judge, which is impugned before us. The appellant herein joined service as L.D.. Clerk in the Transport Department of the Government of Kerala. After joining service in 1988, on the allegation of some misconduct he was suspended from service on 15.10.1991. He was imposed with the punishment of barring of increment and the suspension period ultimately was treated as eligible leave. When the same came to be challenged before this Court, a direction was given to re-consider the issue. Ultimately, the action, in pursuance of the charge sheet issued to him was dropped and the period of suspension was treated as duty for all purposes. W.A.No.1685 OF 2011 2 3. The grievance of the appellant is that though he was entitled for a promotion as he has put in more than 20 years' of service, he was not given the said promotion on the ground that he has not completed the departmental test in accordance with the Rule 13A of Part II of KS & SSR. Aggrieved by the same, he approached the learned single Judge seeking the following reliefs: “i) declare that the petitioner ought to be granted notional promotion and all other consequential benefits thereof from 1989 onwards; ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 1st respondent directing to issue orders promoting the petitioner from 1989 and grant him all other consequential benefits thereof. iii) issue a appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents directing them to disburse the interest on the salary for the period from 15.10.1991 to 02.07.1993 which was granted in October, 2003. iv) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction to the 1st respondent directing him to disburse festival allowance which would have accrued to the W.A.No.1685 OF 2011 3 petitioner as per Exhibit P2 order from 15.10.1991 to 02.07.1993; And v) grant the petitioner his costs in the above writ petition and to pass such further orders which may he deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 4. We note from the records that right from 1991 onwards there was initiation of action for some misconduct in the department. In the year 2003, it came to an end on account of a direction given by this Court. The fact remains, he was entitled for promotion, according to him, much earlier to 2006. This is evident from the reliefs he has sought, as he has sought notional promotion and consequential benefits right from 1989 onwards. He is still in service. If he was entitled for promotion, he ought to have sought such a direction as and when he was entitled for the promotion. Right from 1989 onwards, he was sleeping over the issue and only in 2006, he opened his eyes and approached this Court. There is no explanation for the delay and laches on W.A.No.1685 OF 2011 4 the part of the appellant in approaching this Court. 5. Even otherwise, going through Rule 13A and 13AA of the KS & SSR, Rule 13AA indicates the power of the authority of the Government to issue an order exempting for a specified period any member or members belonging to SC/ST who are already in service from passing the departmental test contemplated under Rule 13 and 13A. Apparently, the departmental test which the appellant was required to complete is contemplated under Rule 13A. The notification issued by the Government, as narrated at paragraph '5' of the counter affidavit of the State indicates, it was issued by the Government exempting persons belonging to SC/ST communities who are already in service, from passing the test required for the promotion and the condition is, such persons, ought to have entered the service on or before 31.12.1985. If the appellant has joined the service on or before 31.12.1985, he would also have the benefit of exemption granted by the Government as per the G.O. issued by the Government. If he has joined the service subsequent to 31.1.2.1985, automatically he will not get any W.A.No.1685 OF 2011 5 exemption from passing the test. Apparently, the appellant joined the service on 02.03.1988. Therefore, there is no exemption for him from passing the required test for promotion within three years after being promoted temporarily as contemplated under rule 13A of the Rules. The learned single Judge by referring to this Government Order has rightly opined that the appellant cannot seek for such exemption. Even otherwise, we are of the opinion that for the delay and laches alone, he is not entitled for any of the reliefs. Viewed from any angle we are of the opinion nothing remains for consideration in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. MANJULA CHELLUR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk