IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2008 / 4TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 32005 of 2004(S) -------------------------- OA.807/2002 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- T.K. MULLAKOYA, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. LATE BADUSHA, SHIPPING INSPECTOR, PORT DEPARTMENT, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP, RESIDING AT THOTTATHAKARA, KAVARATTI ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. 2. THE ADMINISTRATOR, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI. 3. THE PORT OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF PORTS, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI. 4. K.F.D. MOHAMMED, PORT ASSISTANT GRADE A, DEPT. OF PORTS, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MOHAMMED PUZHAKKARA, ADDL.CGSC SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,SC,LAKSHADWEEP ADMN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/01/2008, tHE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.32005/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE F.NO.1/5/92-PORT DT. 27.11.92 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/20/87-PORT DT. 20.4.89 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2(a):- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/2/89 - PORT (1) DT.20.2.92 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2(b):- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/2/89-PORT(1) DT. 27.2.95 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2(c):- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/4/97-PORT (1) DT. 19.3.98 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P(d):- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/4/99-PORT (1) DT. 22.3.99 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2(e):- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/4/2000 PORT(1) DT. 14.2.2000 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2(f):- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/7/2001-POER (10 dt. 22.2.2001 OF 2nd RESPONDENT EXT.P2(g):- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/4/02-PORT (1) DT. 28.3.02 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2(h):- COPY OF THE ORDER F. NO.1/9/2003-PORT (1) DT. 29.3.04 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 25.7.02 IN OA. NO.472/2000 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.807/02 DT. 21.11.02 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. E.XT.P5:- COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT DT. 25.2.03 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM IN OA. NO.807/2002. EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 13.7.04 IN OA. NO.807/02 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM. EXT.P7:- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.3/13/92-PORT DT. 8.6.92 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. W.P.(C) NO.32005/2004 EXT.P8:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION F.NO. 1/11/81 SHIPPING DT. 10.9.82 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P9:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION D.T. .21.7.94 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P10:- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/27/94-PORT DT. 31.5.99 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EX.T.P11:- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/13/2000 PORT DT. 11.11.02 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P12:- COPY OF THE ORDER F.NO.1/20/97-PORT DT. 14.10.99 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS EXT.R2(a):- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.F.NO.1/27/94-PORT DT. 21.11.02 /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss C.N. Ramachandran Nair & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).NO.32005 OF 2004-S - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. The petitioner who was appointed as a Tally Clerk by the Lakshadweep Administration, was later appointed in a leave vacancy as Shipping Inspector on 22.6.1992. The Departmental Promotion Committee recommended the petitioner's case for promotion to the post of Shipping Inspector and consequently the petitioner was given regular appointment as Shipping Inspector on 29.6.1999. The petitioner filed an Original Application before the Tribunal stating that the 4th respondent was in the same position as that of the petitioner who was given promotion with retrospective effect by taking into account his adhoc service. 2. Before the Tribunal, the second respondent stated that the petitioner's allegation of discrimination does not survive, as the mistake committed in the case of the 4th respondent was corrected by making his promotion effective from the date of recommendation by the D.P.C. The Tribunal, therefore, dismissed the petitioner's application as the ground of challenge no longer survives. WPC 32005/2004 -2- 3. Before us, the petitioner has raised another ground that if the D.P.C. Meeting was held earlier, the petitioner would have got promotion from an earlier date, as vacancy existed. In the counter affidavit, the respondents have stated that the delay in holding of D.P.C. meeting was on account of petitioner's delay in submitting the Confidential Report. In any case, we are not shown any rule authorising granting of promotion with a retrospective date to cover the delay in holding the meeting by the D.P.C. If regular appointment was held up for want of D.P.C. meeting, the petitioner should have approached the authorities or the court for a direction to hold the D.P.C. meeting and for filling up of the vacancy in time. 4. Since there is no rule to treat adhoc service as regular service or for giving promotion with retrospective effect on account of delay in holding D.P.C. Meeting , we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (C.N. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) WPC 32005/2004 -3- kav/ C.N. Ramachandran Nair & & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . No. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT WPC 32005/2004 -4- 10th January, 2008.