IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2009 / 1ST MAGHA 1930 WA.No. 1809 of 2006(A) ---------------------- (AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.15810/2006 Dated 20/06/2006) APPELLANTS/ PETITIONERS: ------------------------------- 1. K.S. VIJAYANANDAN, KIZHAKKE EDANATTUKALAYIL, KAIPUZHA POST, KOTTAYAM, WORKING AS PROCESS SERVER, DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM. 2. P.R. RENJITH, PUTHUVALSTHALATHU HOUSE, THEKKENMALIPURAM, AZHEEKKAL, KOCHI-682 510, WORKING AS PROCESS SERVER, DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM. 3. V. LEKSHMANA PAI, 10/32, AMARAVATHI, KOCHI-682 001, WORKING AS ATTENDER SUB COURT ERNAKULAM. 4. ANIRUDHAN M.S., MUNDUKATTU HOUSE, KUMBALANGI P.O., KOCHI, WORKING AS PROCESS SERVER, DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM. 5. M.S. SAJEEV, MUKKUTTATHIL PARAMBU, KAPRASSERY, NEDUMBASSERY, WORKING AS ATTENDER, FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU ADV. SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI ADV. SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN ADV. SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. K.K. SOBHANA, PROCESS SERVER, DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. SHRI BENNY GERVASIS.. R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY BY ADV. SMT.N.SANTHA BY ADV. SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. ........................................................................ W.A. No. 1809 OF 2006 ......................................................................... Dated this the 21st January, 2009 J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. : The appellants are the writ petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 15810 of 2006. They approached this court aggrieved by the amendment introduced to Rule 10 of the Kerala Judicial Ministerial Subordinate Service Rules . 2. Learned Senior Government Pleader submits that the amendment itself was introduced only to enable the category wherein the appellants/petitioners are included, viz., Amins and Attenders to aspire for further promotions. Contending that the amendment is of no benefit to that category, the Writ Petition was filed challenging the vires of the Rule itself. It is submitted that the said amendment has seriously affected the qualified Attenders and Amins, since their promotional avenues have been W.A. No. 1809 OF 2006 2 blocked by the unqualified Amins and Attenders . Hence, it is submitted that the Government should have at least fixed a ratio for the qualified Amins and Attenders. 3. If they face such difficulties, it is for them to point out such difficulties before the rule making authorities, so that the said authorities will get an opportunity to look into the matter and if necessary, to take appropriate remedial measures. In this context, learned counsel for the appellants/petitioners seeks for permission to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to approach the Government. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants/petitioners, some of which are referred to above, we are of the view that an opportunity, as prayed for, should be granted to the appellants/petitioners. Accordingly, we set aside the judgment under appeal, dismiss the Writ Petition as withdrawn with liberty to the appellants/petitioners to approach the first respondent by way of appropriate representations incorporating all their grievances. In the event of such representations being filed, either by the association in which the petitioners are members W.A. No. 1809 OF 2006 3 or by the petitioners themselves, the matter will be duly considered by the first respondent with notice to the petitioners and representatives of the affected parties, as expeditiously as possible. The Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk