IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2011 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 7643 of 2007(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- LT.COL.(RETD.) K.R.SASHIDHARAN, S/O LATE P.R.KRISHNAN NAMBIAR, 'KRISHNA', NEAR VANIVILASAM U.P.SCHOOL, P.O.CHOVVA, KANNUR-670 004. BY ADV. SRI.V. RAJGOPAL. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. COL.RANJIT SINGH, STATION COMMANDER, STATION HEAD QUARTERS, KANNUR. 2. SUB-AREA COMMANDER, HQ K2K SUB-AREA, CUBBON ROAD, BANGALORE. 3. GOC, HQ ATN K2K AREA, ISLAND GROUNDS, CHENNAI. 4. CIL.(RE.CMP) K.V.R.VARIER, STAFF OFFICER ECHS, STATION HQ, KANNUR. 5. MD ECHS, CENTRAL ORGANIZATION ECHS, AG'S BRANCH, MAUDE LINES, DELHI CANT. -10. R1 TO R5 BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.S.G. OF INDIA, SRI.A. DINESH RAO, C.G.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. W.P.(C). NO.7643/2007-I: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE GENERAL OFFICER COMMANDING (GOC) ATNK 2K AREA ORDER DTD. 23 FEBRUARY 2004 ISSUED VIDE NO.140087/EMP/ECHS DTD. 26 FEBRUARY 2004. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE ORDER NO.24 (6)/03/U3(WE)/D/RES DTD. 22/09/2003. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY DY. MD DTD. 7TH MARCH 2006. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S LETTER NO.27281/KRS DTD. 06/02/2007. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.2008/ECHS/EMP/KNR DTD. 16/02/2007 ISSUED BY R.1. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 18/02/2007 SENT BY PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R1.A: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B/49760/AG/ECHS(R) DTD. 08/02/2005. EXT.R1.B: COPY OF THE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 19/03/2006. EXT.R1.C: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 23/01/2007. EXT.R1.D: COPY OF THE 3 SUPERIOR OFFICERS OF ECHS VIDE ASSESSMENT OF ECHS POLYCLINIC STAFF REPORT DTD. 04/02/2007. EXT.R1.E: COPY OF THE RECEIPT SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 7643 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T As per the Ex-Servicemen Contributory Health Scheme, ex-servicemen were entitled to be appointed in various establishments belonging to the Government of India. In accordance with the said Scheme, the petitioner, who is an ex-serviceman, was appointed as Officer-in- Charge of the Polyclinic, Kannur. He was appointed for 11 months on 17.04.2004. It was further extended by another 11 months. His tenure was due for renewal on 18.2.2007 when by Ext.P5 the petitioner was informed that extension of his employment is not approved. According to the petitioner, the non-approval for extension was without assigning any reason. The petitioner would contend that the petitioner is entitled to renewal until the date of superannuation which is 65 years. The petitioner was only 60 years at the time of filing of the writ petition and W.P.(C)No. 7643 of 2007 -2- therefore the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction quashing Exhibit -P5; ii) Declare that 4th respondent is legally incompetent to hold the post of OIC Polyclinic, Kannur, iii) To issue a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents 1 to 3 from appointing the 4th respondent as OIC of Polyclinic, Kannur and in the event of he is taken charge to remove him from the said post; (iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to grant renewal of the tenure of the petitioner as OIC Polyclinic, Kannur for a further period of 12 months and not to appoint any other person as OIC of Polyclinic, Kannur; 2. A counter affidavit has been filed wherein the stand taken by the respondents is that it was decided not to approve the petitioner's extension on the ground of unsatisfactory conduct and performance. They have detailed various instances of serious misbehavior by the petitioner towards doctors and ex-servicemen who sought treatment in the Polyclinic. Therefore the matter was placed before a committee of 3 superior officers under the Ex-Servicemen Contributory Health Scheme, who assessed his performance and by Ext.R1 (d), did not recommend the petitioner for extension of employment. It is pursuant to W.P.(C)No. 7643 of 2007 -3- the same that the petitioner was denied approval for extension of employment, is their contention. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. The petitioner heavily relies on Ext.P3, wherein the Central Organisation of ECHS has taken a decision that contractual employment at ECHS Polyclinic will be for a period upto superannuation on renewal after every 11 months based on the review of conduct and performance of contractual employee. Ext.P3 itself would go to show that the renewal of the contractual employment is subject to good conduct and performance by the employee. In the petitioner's case, the respondents have narrated 9 specific instances of misbehavior on the part of the petitioner. Further, 3 superior officers of ECHS had assessed the conduct and performance of the petitioner and submitted Ext.R1 (d) report, wherein the petitioner's conduct and performance has been assessed as unsatisfactory in respect of 7 qualities and only satisfactory in respect of three and the committee did not recommend the petitioner for W.P.(C)No. 7643 of 2007 -4- extension of employment. Although in the reply affidavit filed, the petitioner would dispute the allegation, I have no reason to disbelieve the assessment by 3 superior officers of ECHS against whom the petitioner does not allege any malafides or improper motive. In the above circumstances, I am not inclined to countenance the contentions of the petitioner in the writ petition. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/