IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 19TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 12811 of 2007(A) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- G.LAILA KUMARI, SENIOR GRADE STENOGRAPHER, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE DIVISION, SIDCO HEAD OFFICE, P.B.NO.50,HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY ADVS. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SRI.P.M.BENZIR, SRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, P.B.NO.50,HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,P.B.NO.50,HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETRIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. S.MOHANA KUMARI, STENOGRAPHER GRADE-I, KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,P.B.NO.50,HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. R1 & R2 BY SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. SRI.K.ANAND, SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN, R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI, R4 BY ADVS.SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF, SMT.MOLLY JACOB, SRI.JOBI.A.THAMPI, SMT.M.KABANI DINESH, SMT.RABIA BEEGAM T.K, SRI.C.K.RAFEEK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.12811/2007-A: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE G.O.(RT).NO.280/07/ID DTD. 06/03/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.3. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.PER(1)/3643/07 DTD. 23/03/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. SIDCO/RI/06-07 DTD. 04/04/2007 OF THE R.1. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 07/04/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.2. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE NOTE NO.PER (I)/3643/07 DTD. 09/04/2007 ISSUED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER OF THE R.1. CORPORATION TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R1.A: COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 24/03/2007. EXT.R4.A: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD 16/4/86 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.R4.B: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 09/07/87 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.R4.C: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 25/02/92 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.R4.D: COPY OF THE G.O.(MS).NO.105/2000/ID DTD. 28/07/2000. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 12811 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner filed this writ petition while she was working as a Senior Grade Stenographer and the 4th respondent was working as Stenographer Grade -I in the 1st respondent. By Ext.P1 order dated 06.03.2007, the Government regularised the appointment of the 4th respondent as Stenographer Grade-II with effect from 16.04.1986 on the basis of an application of the 4th respondent dated 15.11.2003. Thereafter Ext.P2 notice was issued to the petitioner directing her to show cause why pursuant to Ext.P1 Government order the seniority position as between the petitioner and the 4th respondent should not be revised. 15 days' time was granted to the petitioner to submit her objections. But neither a copy of the Government order or any other materials in support of the proposal was furnished to the petitioner. The petitioner W.P.(C)No. 12811 of 2007 -2- obtained the copies by resort to the proceedings under the Right to Information Act and sought some more time to file objections which was rejected by Ext.P5. It is under the above circumstances the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “(i) To issue a Writ of Certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Exts. P1 and P5 and quash the same. (ii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to provide reasonable time and opportunity to the petitioner to submit objection pursuant to Ext.P2 notice. (iii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the Respondents 1 to 3 from implementing Ext.P1 Government order till the Petitioner is provided with reasonable opportunity to submit her objection to Exts.P1 and P2 and till the Petitioner heard in the matter. (iv) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring Ext.P1 as invalid being one passed without notice to the Petitioner. (v) To issue a writ of Mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to hear the Petitioner and take fresh decision in the matter of regularisation of the 4th Respondent in the post of Stenographer Grade -II with retrospectively effect.” 2. At the time of admission on 12.04.2007 this court passed the following interim order: “Standing counsel takes notice for respondents 1 and 2. Learned Government Pleader takes notice for R3. Notice to R4. W.P.(C)No. 12811 of 2007 -3- There will be interim order that regularisation of the service of the 4th respondent shall not be a ground for reviewing the inter-se seniority between the petitioner and the 4th respondent, for a period of four months.” The counsel for the 4th respondent today submits that the 4th respondent has already retired from service and therefore there is no point in considering the matter on merits, especially in view of the interim order. Therefore it is submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the interim order. The petitioner also agrees to the said course of action. Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above interim order dated 12.04.2007. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/