IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1930 OP.No. 24935 of 2000(R) ------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------- A.P. ANIL KUMAR, HEAD CLERK, DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV.MR.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY MS.RESMI G. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, DIRECTORATE OF EMPLOYMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. JOINT DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT, DIRECTORATE OF EMPLOYMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. K. VISWAMBARAN, HEAD CLERK, DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, KOZHIKODE UNDER ORDERS OF PROMOTION AS JUNIOR EMPLOYMENT OFFICER AND POSTING TO TOWN EMPLOYEMNT EXCHANGE, SULTAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 6. K.G. BALACHANDRAN, HEAD CLERK, TOWN EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. OP.No. 24935 of 2000 7. R. LAKSHMANAN, HEAD CLERK, DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, ALAPPUZHA. 8. K.V. MATHEW, HEAD CLERK, TOWN EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 9. P.N. SABJITH, HEAD CLERK, TOWN EMPLOYEMNT EXCHANGE, CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MS. SMITHA SUKUMAR FOR R1 TO 4 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 24935 of 2000 ORDER ON C.M.P.NO.42035/2000 IN O.P.NO.24935/2000 CLOSED. 24.2.2009. SD/- S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: COPY OF ORDER NO.J(1) 20616/90 DTD 11.7.1990 OF R3. EXT.P2: COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE PROVISIONAL SENIORITY LIST OF HEAD CLERK, U.D. CLERKS & TRANSLATOR IN THE EMPLOYMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT AS ON 1.1.1995 WAS PUBLISHED AS PER ORDER NO.J4-22239/95 DTD 1.7.1996 OF R2. EXT.P3: COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE ORDER NO.J4-17244/97 DTD 2.2.1998 OF R3. EXT.P4: COPY OF ORDER NO.J4-28252/99 DTD 19.8.1999 OF R3. EXT.P4(a): COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE APPENDED PROVISIONAL SENIORITY LIST OF U.D. CLERK/TRANSLATOR IN THE DEPARTMENT FROM 13.2.1972TO 31.12.1997. EXT.P5; COPY OF OBJECTION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2 DTD 3.9.1999. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.J4/29063/99 DTD 20.8.1999 OF R3. EXT.P6(a): COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE APPENDED PROVISIONAL SENIORITY LIST OF HEAD CLERKS FOR THE PERIOD FROM 26.3.1997 TO 21.10.1998. EXT.P7: COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE ORDER NO.J4-28252/99 DTD 18.9.1999 OF R3. EXT.P7(a): COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE APPENDED FINAL SENIORITY LIST OF U.D.CLERK/TRANSLATOR IN THE DEPARTMENT FROM 13.2.1972 TO 31.12.1997. EXT.P8: COPY OF JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN O.P. NO.21679/98. EXT.P9: COPY OF ORDER NO.J4/29063/99 DTD 27.9.1999 OF R3. EXT.P9(a): COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE APPENDED FINAL SENIORITY LIST OF HEAD CLERKS FROM 26.3.1997 TO 21.10.1998. EXT.P10: COPY OF ORDER NO.J-1/13140/2000 DTD 11.8.2000 OF R4. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ O.P.No. 24935 OF 2000 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT The challenge in this original petition is against seniority given to respondents 5 to 9 above the petitioner in the cadre of U.D. Clerk and subsequent cadres. Originally, Ext.P2 provisional seniority list was published in which the petitioner was at Serial No.115 whereas the 5th respondent was at 149, the 6th respondent at 127, the 7th respondent at 125, the 8th respondent at 128 and the 9th respondent at 126, all below the petitioners. The petitioner was appointed as U.D. Clerk on 11.7.1990 whereas the party respondents were appointed during February and June 1991. In subsequent seniority lists namely, Exts.P3(a), P4(a), P6(a), P7(a) and P9(a), the petitioner was shown below respondents 5 to 9, which is under challenge in this original petition. Another challenge is against Ext.P10 order, whereby the 5th respondent was given promotion as Junior Employment Officer in preference to the petitioner, although the 5th respondent was junior to the petitioner. O.P.No24935/2000 2 2. Although detailed counter affidavit has been filed seeking to refute the contentions of the petitioner, it is now admitted by both sides that this Court has in other writ petitions quashed Exts.P3(a), P4(a), P6(a), P7(a) and P9(a) seniority lists. That being so, I am spared of considering the validity of those seniority lists in this original petition. Once those seniority lists were quashed, respondents 1 to 4 are bound to pass fresh seniority list in accordance with the findings in the judgment, wherein those seniority lists were quashed. Neither the petitioner nor the learned Government Pleader could tell me as to whether any such fresh seniority list has been published pursuant to the said judgment. Although notice has been received by respondents 5 to 7, they have not chosen to enter appearance and contest the matter. That being so, I must assume that after quashing of the impugned seniority lists, no fresh seniority list has been published. In that case the 5th respondent could not have been preferred for further promotion in preference to the petitioner since going by dates of appointment as U.D. Clerk, the petitioner was senior to the 5th respondent. Therefore, Ext.P10, in so far as it promotes the 5th respondent in preference to the petitioner, is O.P.No24935/2000 3 quashed. It would be open to respondents 1 to 4 to prepare a fresh seniority lists in accordance with law and make further promotions in accordance with such seniority lists. I make it clear that in view of the quashing of the seniority lists, which are challenged in this original petition, in other writ petitions, I have not considered the claims of the petitioner on merits. Needless to say, the case of the petitioner for seniority over respondents 5 to 9 shall be considered in accordance with law, while preparing fresh seniority lists. The original petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd O.P.No24935/2000 4