IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30198 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ K.B.RAMESAN NAIR, FIRST GRADE OVERSEER, THODUPUZHA MUNICIPALITY, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN SRI.NITA N.S. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, 3RD FLOOR, REVENUE COMPLEX, PUBLIC OFFICE COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, URBAN AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. PRAKASAN.R., ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PEELIKODE/PADANNA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, UNDER NEELESWARAM BLOCK PANCHAYAT, MALAPPURAM. 5. SALIHAN.C.A., ASSISTANT ENGINEER, VETTATHOOR/MELATTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, UNDER PERINTHALMANNA BLOCK PANCHAYAT, MALAPPURAM. 6. SUJA KUMARI.S., MULANKUNNATHUKAVU/ THOLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, UNDER PUZHAKKAL BLOCK PANCHAYAT, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 7. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 30198 OF 2009 (T) ===================== Dated this the 19th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's grievance is that due to the pendency of disciplinary action and the Vigilance Enquiry, initiated in 2005 and 2004, he has been overlooked in the matter of promotion from the post of Overseer to Assistant Engineer. 2. Learned Government Pleader was directed to obtain instructions about the stage of the Vigilance Enquiry allegedly pending against the petitioner. On instructions, it is informed that Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau has concluded the investigation and recommended departmental action against the petitioner and that departmental action has been initiated. 3. However, the contention of the petitioner is that despite pendency of the said proceedings, he ought to have been considered in the matter of promotion. True, as contended, inspite of the pendency of the proceedings, petitioner was eligible to have been considered adopting the sealed cover procedure as provided in the Rules. It is not clear whether such proceedings have been initiated. WPC 30198/09 :2 : 4. Having regard to the fact that the select list has been published, it is now reported by the counsel for the petitioner that they have submitted a representation to the Convener of DPC on 11/11/2009, objecting to the select list and seeking his consideration and inclusion. Having regard to the above, this writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment before the Convener of the DPC, in which case, it is directed that the Convener shall take appropriate action on the representation sent by the petitioner. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp