IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2008 / 23RD SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24553 of 2008(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ P.C.SREELATHA, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, ANTHICAUD, TRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY CUM CONVENER, DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 24553 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 14th August, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is presently working as Assistant Director of Agriculture. The next promotion post is that of Deputy Director of Agriculture. The petitioner's grievance is that overlooking her seniority and merit,her juniors have been included in Exhibit-P2 select list for promotion to the cadre of Deputy Director of Agriculture. The petitioner submits that among the persons selected for appointment to the post of Deputy Director of Agriculture, Serial Nos. 12 to 27 are her juniors and that for no justifiable reason she was not considered for promotion to the post of Deputy Director or included in the select list. The petitioner has submitted Exhibit-P3 representation to the Convener of the Departmental Promotion Committee objecting to the non-inclusion of her name in the select list and seeking revision of the select list under Rule 28 (b) (i) (8) (a) of Part II of the K.S.& S.S.R. The learned W.P ( C) No. 24553 of 2008 2 counsel for the petitioner submits that Exhibit-P3 representation was submitted to the Convener of the Departmental Promotion Committee within one month from the date on which Exhibit-P2 select list was published in the official gazette. 2. When the writ petition came up for admission today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as the Convener of the Departmental Promotion Committee is yet to take a decision in the matter the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the second respondent, the Convener of the Departmental Promotion Committee to consider Exhibit-P3 and pass orders thereon within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to supplement Exhibit-P3 by filing an additional representation. 3. I have heard Smt.M.R. Sreelatha, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents also. Rule 28 (b) (i) (8) (a) of Part II of the K.S. & S.S.R enables the officer whose name has not been included in W.P ( C) No. 24553 of 2008 3 the select list to make a written representation to the Convener of the Departmental Promotion Committee to revise the select list and to include his/her name therein. It is a statutory remedy available to an employee in the event of supersession. As the petitioner has availed that remedy and within the time prescribed therefor, it cannot be rendered infructuous by the delay in its disposal. In my opinion, the grievance voiced by the petitioner in Exhibit-P3 merits consideration at the hands of the second respondent. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider Exhibit-P3 and the further representation which the petitioner shall file within two days from today and pass necessary orders thereon, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the second respondent, for compliance. (P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 24553 of 2008 4 W.P ( C) No. 24553 of 2008 5