IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2009 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 5119 of 2009(H) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.M. ALI, S/O.MUHAMMED, BADGE NO.12741 CRAFTS MAN RIGGER, MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE DEPT. F.A.C.T. (P.D), UDYOGAMANDAL P.O. BY ADV. MR.P.K.ABOOBACKER(EDAPPALLY) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE F.A.C.T. LTD., REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, UDYOGAMANDAL. 2. THE CHIEF PERSONAL MANAGER, F.A.C.T. (LD), UDYOGAMANDAL R1 & R2 BY ADVS. MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, MR.K.JOHN MATHAI, MR.P.BENNY THOMAS, MR.ANIL D. NAIR, MR.V.J.ANAND. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.5119/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE RANK LIST DTD. NIL PUBLISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 4.8.90 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 2.2.06 IN WPC. 24074/2000. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.5119 of 2009-H - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner herein was originally appointed as Helper (Maintenance) pursuant to conduct of a physical test, wherein he competed along with other persons and he was provisionally selected and included in the rank list as per Ext.P1. In the panel for the post he was ranked as 15. 2.The petitioner was thereafter informed by Ext.P2 dated 4.8.1990 that the certificates will have to be subjected to verification further and on completion of the verification and enquiry and on satisfactory confirmation of the genuineness of the certificates and correctness of the details furnished, his case will be considered for appointment as Helper (Maintenance). It was mentioned therein that if and when he is offered appointment as Helper (Maintenance), his relative rank position shown in the notification will remain unaffected. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that after four months, he received the appointment order posting him as Helper (Maintenance) with effect from 1.12.1990. Accordingly, he started his career with the respondents. 4. Presently, the petitioner is aggrieved by the refusal of the wpc 5119/2009 2 respondents to consider his seniority as promised in Ext.P2 for promotion to the post of Senior Craftsman . The petitioner has approached this court by filing this writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to prepare a fresh seniority list of Helper (Maintenance) including the petitioner in the respective seniority position as per the relative rank position. He is relying upon Ext.P3 judgment of this Court wherein one Shri V.M. Shajahan is the petitioner and it is submitted that he is similarly placed and this court had directed that seniority position will be fixed in terms of the rank in the notification dated 28.6.1990. 5. The respondents have filed a statement and the petitioner has filed a reply affidavit also. It is pointed out in the statement that the petitioner was 32nd to be appointed from the list of Helpers and his seniority was reckoned with effect from the date of appointment. The petitioner had not disputed his seniority at any point of time and it is for the first time that a dispute is raised after a delay of nearly two decades after the appointment. He was granted promotions as Rigger Assistant on 16.7.1995 and Craftsman Rigger on 16.7.1999 on the basis of the seniority. It is also mentioned that he has been granted two jumps in scale on 1.4.2004 and 1.4.2008 on the basis of his seniority. It is pointed out that the seniority as now claimed by him will affect the rights of others. It is also contended that the petitioner is wpc 5119/2009 3 guilty of delay and laches and therefore the claim cannot be considered at all. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the seniority of others will not be affected. It is up to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in terms of the relevant orders and circulars issued in the matter. If the petitioner files an appropriate representation before the second respondent within three weeks from today, the same will be considered in accordance with law. While examining the case of the petitioner, the question whether the seniority of any other person will be affected, will also be examined and appropriate reply will be given to the petitioner expeditiously. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/