IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 36168 of 2005(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.CHENTHAMARAKSHAN, S/O.KUNJU, AGED 54 YEARS, CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSORT CORPROATION, PALAKKAD AND RESIDING AT SANKARATHANKADE HOUSE, P.O. MARUTHA ROAD, PALAKKAD 7. BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PALAKKAD. R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC,KSRTC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.36168/2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER NO.PL5-347/80/TCR DATED 15/9/1980 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT TRANSORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C. CORPORATION, TRICHUR TO THE PETITIONER. P1(A) COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06/09/82 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE GENERAL MANAGER,K.S.R.T.C. CORPORATION,CHIEF OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P2 COPY OF THE MEMO NO.PLA5-72312/82 DATED 20/11/1982 ISSUED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, K.S.R.T.C. CORPORATION, TRIVANDRUM TO THE PETITIONER. P3 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO.PLA4-97834/82 DATED 27/11/1982 ISSUED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, K.S.R.T.C. CORPORATION, TRIVANDRUM TO THE PETITIONER. P4 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. P5 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07/02/2000 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. P6 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO.PLA4-015124/2000 DATED 08/08/2000 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT. P7 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO.PLA4-01524/2000 DATED 14/21.03.2001 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT. P8 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21/06/2002 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. P9 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24/01/2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. P10 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO.PL.9/006495/04 DATED 23/04/2004 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT. P11 COPY OF THE C.O.MEMORANDUM NO.PL-9/6495/04/TVM DATED 30/09/2005 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR(A&S), TRIVANDRUM TO THE PETITIONER. P12 COPY OF THE REVISED DRAFT GRADATION LIST OF CONDUCTORS AS ON 01/04/2001-PART-I(SPECIAL GRADE) CONDUCTORS APPOINTED UPTO THE ADVICE LIST NO.PLA11/82478/83 DATED 06/10/1983. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ sts P.A.TO.JUDGE S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 36168 of 2005 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 3rd day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was an employee of the Kerals State Road Transport Corporation. He has a dispute regarding his seniority in service. Originally, pursuant to orders of this Court in O.P.No.11412/2000, by Ext.P7 order appropriate seniority has been assigned to the petitioner. But, later on, by the impugned orders, the petitioner's seniority has been revised. Petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “i. Call for the records leading to the issuance of Exts. P10, P11 and P12; ii. declare that Exts. P10, P11 and P12 ( in respect of the petitioner ) are unsustainable in the eyes of law; iii. issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing Exts. P10, P11, and P12 (in respect of the petitioner ); iv. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, restoring Ext.P6 in force with further direction to release of all consequential benefits accrued therefrom within a reasonable time.” 2. All what the petitioner seeks in this writ petition is seniority and consequential benefits. The petitioner does not submit that if the seniority is revised as claimed by him, the petitioner would get any promotion and consequential monetary benefits. In such circumstances, the petitioner having retired from service at least 5 years ago, there is no point in considering this writ petition on merits insofar as W.P(C) No. 36168 of 2005 -: 2 :- by granting seniority, the petitioner would not get any monetary benefits. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/