IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 20013 of 2008(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER : ------------------ ABRAHAM K.JOHN, G.A.S.I.(H.C.NO.453), KALPETTA POLICE STATION, KALPETTA, WAYANAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENTS : ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KANNUR RANGE, KANNUR. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, WAYANAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).20013/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is a Head Constable and claims eligibility to be considered for regular cadre promotion to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector. He has been granted Grade designation as Assistant Sub Inspector in terms of G.O. (MS).No.142/06 dated 22.8.2006. 2. He was considered for cadre promotion in the year 2006. But the Departmental Promotion Board superceded him on the basis of certain adverse remarks in his confidential record for the period from 1.1.2003 to 31.12.2003 and 1.1.2005 to 25.12.2005. Another reason mentioned in the record was the pendency of an oral enquiry consequent upon a complaint alleging institution of false complaint by the petitioner against one Navarang Mohan. Petitioner preferred an appeal before the DIG of Police for expunging the adverse remarks which was rejected under Ext.P1 and the said order was confirmed under Ext.P2 order passed by the DGP on the premise W.P.(C).20013/2008 2 that the appeal is not maintainable. Challenging Ext.P2, petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 representation before the Government, which is still pending. 3. For the year 2007 also DGP superceded the petitioner on the same ground as were found in the year 2006. Challenging the supercession effected under EXt.P4, petitioner has preferred an appeal as Ext.P6 before the Inspector General of Police and the same is pending. 4. Government is yet to take a decision on Ext.P3 and if the Government accepts the petitioner's request, it obviously will have an impact on the supercession of the petitioner both for the year 2006 and 2007. 5. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. W.P.(C).20013/2008 3 6. In the result, writ petition is disposed of in the following terms. 7. First respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This shall be done after hearing the petitioner. On production of the copy of the order passed by the first respondent before the second respondent, he shall proceed to pass orders on Ext.P6 within four weeks thereafter. Petitioner is at liberty to supplement Ext.P6. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with the copy of the judgment independently before respondents 1 and 2. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs